Close
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Concepts of self-realization (a comparison of the concept of self-realization in the "Bhagavadgita" with that concept in the Pauline Epistles)
(USC Thesis Other)
Concepts of self-realization (a comparison of the concept of self-realization in the "Bhagavadgita" with that concept in the Pauline Epistles)
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
CONCEPTS OP SELF-REALIZATION
(A COMPARISON OP THE CONCEPT OP SELP-REALIZATION IN THE
BHAGAVADSITA WITH THAT CONCEPT IN THE PAULINE EPISTLES)
A Thesis
Presented to
the Faculty of the Graduate School
The University of Southern California
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Arts
by
Albert John Casebeer
January 1952
UMI Number: EP67916
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
UMI EP67916
Published by ProQuest LLC (2015). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 - 1346
This thesis, written by
....... ABSRT__JOm__CASEBSm........... .
under the guidance of h..X3..Facuity Committee,
and approved by all its members, has been
presented to and accepted by the Council on
Graduate Study and Research in partial fu lfill
ment of the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
Date................... January 17, 1952
Faculty Committee
_ .. Chairman
....
....
TABLE OP CONTENTS '
,CHAPTER PAGE |
i
I. INTRODUCTION . ............... 1
II. AN APPROACH TO THE CONCEPT OP THE SELF . . 7 j
I
I ^ The concept of the self in the Gita, . . 7 |
' I
I The concept of the self in the Pauline |
epistles 1I 4. :
Summary and comparison 22
III, THE MEANING OF SELP-REALIZATION 2 l | . ,
I The meaning as set forth in the Gita . . 2l\. .
I The meaning as set forth in the Pauline !
epistles.............................. 31
Summary and comparison ♦ i j . 0 |
IV, OBSTACLES TO SELF-REALIZATION ...... i | i | .
^Obstacles as defined in the Gita . , . . j
Obstacles as defined in the Pauline
epistles 49 1
I
Summary and comparison 54
I
V. TECHNIQUES AND MEANS MICH MARE SELF- ^
REALIZATION POSSIBLE................... 57
j Techniques and means as taught in the
Gita .............................. 57
Techniques and means as taught in the |
Pauline epistles ................... ..
66
Ill
CHAPTER
. Summary and comparison .. .. ..... 73
VI, ETHICAL RESULTS OF SELF-REALIZATION , . , , 78
The ethical conflict of Arjuna and Paul. . 78
Ethical results described in the Gita. , . 8l
Ethical results described in the Pauline
epistles •••.. ..................... 86
Summary and comparison . . . . . . . . 91
|VII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION.......... 94
! Summary . . . . . . . . . 94
I Conclusion ..... .................. . 104
IBIBLIOGRAPHY .......................... IO7
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION i
The search for world unity is one of the most press- |
I
ing challenges of our generation. "One World or None" is |
I
the watch word put forth by leaders in many walks of life. |
Such a world oneness is not being found in diplomatic and !
I
military maneuverings. The understending of cultures, spe- :
cifically of the people themselves who make up the cultural
systems of the world, is a first requisite in approaching
world oneness. Knowledge of world religions has always beeni
a prime factor in the tinders tending of these cultures. Un- '
less one makes a sincere attempt to understand a people’s '
religion, little progress will be made toward the under
standing of that people. It is true that religion has too
often become a barrier between peoples. But the acuteness
of the world crisis is more and more demanding that there be
an awakening in all traditional religions so that such re
ligions may be transformed "from repositories of the faith
of the past into bridges across which all honest men may
turn into the wider fellowship of all mankind.
Such a wider fellowship is made difficult by what has
^ Floyd H. Ross, Addressed to Christians, p. 15.
! 2 ;
been called "the most Important ideological conflict con- I
[fronting our world": namely, "the meeting of East and I
West."2 Thus many of the scholars of both the Orient and
the Occident have been seeking for a way toward spiritual
understanding. Such names as "Eraemer, Hocking, Schweitzer,!
Farquhar, Dr. Appasamy, V. Chakkarai, Rudolph Otto, Frederick
Heiler, Rene Guenon, A. W. Watts, Gerald Heard, Professor ;
Radhakrishnan, the late Dr. Tagore, and Dr. Goomaraswamy"8
represent outstanding authorities of the East and of the
West who are longing to discover a common me eting-ground so
that Kipling’s "twain" can meet. i
i
This thesis is another effort in the search for
greater East-West understanding. Religious documents of
India and of Europe/America which have had unquestioned in
fluence in their respective areas are to be examined; these
documents are the Bhagavadgita and the Pauline epistles.
The former book has been called "probably the most important
single work ever produced in India."4- Rudolph Otto states:
"In India, to a very great extent, The Bhagavad-Gita,
2 F. S. C. Northrop, The Meeting of East and West,
p. X.
^ Mani D. Patial, "Christian Prayer and Raja Yoga: a i
Study in Correlation," p. 2.
^ Ananda K. Coomaraswamy, Hinduism and Buddhism, p. 4*
3
occupies the exalted position that the New Testament • . .
holds in the religious world of the West.In fact, the
Gita is so highly esteemed that it is used, like the Chris
tian Bible in the West, for the administration of oaths in
'the Indian law courts.^
; The writings of the Apostle Paul had been a powerful
force in determining the direction of Western European and
thus Western thought. Albert Schweitzer believes that "the
Christian faith of today, like that of past and future
centuries, is in some way or other determined by P a u l ."7
pr. Floyd Ross states that the "long shadow of Paul’s tower*
ing tumultuous personality has influenced almost all subse
quent Christian thinking for better or for worse.
The examination of these documents from the East and
the West will be limited to the field of study of the self
and the goal or the realization of the self. Men of all
races and nations have been most interested in obeying that
ancient dictum "Know thyself," Because of this interest it
5 Rudolph Otto, The Original Gita, p, 9*
^ A, C. Bouquet, Hinduism, p. 82.
^ Albert Schweitzer, The Mysticism of Paul the
Apostle, p. 395. — —
^ Ross, pp_. cit., p.
k .
may be possible that on the meeting-ground of self-discovery
1 the Orient and the Occident will find a major area of under-;
standing which will further the progress toward world
I
community. I
I
In cougar ing the East and the West there are certain |
I
I difficulties which must be admitted. For example, consider i
those essential differences in ways of thinking: the East
is concerned with knowledge that is "immediate-experienced,";
whereas the West’s ea^hasis is upon knowledge attained by
the logical methods of science, philosophy, and theology.9
I The handicap of language is always a considerable one: for
example, the problem of e^qpressing certain metaphysical
I
ideas of the East in the language of the West when the lat- |
ter is deficient in appropriate termsObjectivity in
religious research is hard to achieve in view of the essen
tial subjective nature of religion. The investigator is
often tempted either to force similarities or separations
between religions according to his background and tempera
ment. All such difficulties must be acknowledged, but not ;
be permitted to become formidable barriers to research.
In this thesis no attempt will be made to analyze
9 Northrop, op. cit., p. 3&3.
Hene Guenon, Introduction to the Study of Hindu
Doctrines, p. 62.
5 ,
institutions which have their source in the documents under '
i consideration; nor will there be any attempt to evaluate
the behavior of those who accept either the Gita or the
Pauline epistles as religious authorities. The documents j
themselves are being studied. Furthermore, questions of |
I
date, place of writing, authorship, and source of materials i
do not belong within the scope of this thesis.
The Bhagavadgita refers to a portion of the great
Hindu epic the Mahabharata. It was written probably in the
fifth century B.C.^^ The Pauline epistles refer to those
1
letters written in the last half of the first century, A.D. ;
by Paul, an Apostle of Jesus Christ. Those letters accept
ed a;$ Pauline by modern scholarship are: I and II Thessa-
lonians, Galatians, I and II Corinthians, Romans, Colossians,
Philippians, and Philemon.
The plan for developing the thesis falls into five
chapters. In Chapter Two an approach will be made to find |
out what constitutes the self in the two frames of reference.
Chapter Three will set forth the goal for the self: how the
self can realize its true nature and bring to fruition its !
potential. Chapter Four will consider the obstacles which
S. Radhak|*ishnan. The Bhagavadgita. p. l i j , .
12 gj,
ment, p. 72.
Ernest W. Parsons, The Religion of the New Testa-
6
hinder the realization of the self. Chapter Five will dis
cuss the techniques and means by which these obstacles can
be overcome. Chapter Six will examine the ethical results
which are to be evidenced in the realization process.
Quotations from the original will appear in the body :
of the text when they are from the following translations:
The Bhagavad-gita by S. Radhakrishnan and The New Testament:
Revised Standard Version of 1948#
An explanation should be made in regard to the spell
ing of the term self. #hen this term refers to the Atman,
it is spelled with a capital "S." When it refers to the !
empirical self as described either in the Gita or the
Pauline epistles, it is spelled with a small "s." When it I
refers to both of these concepts, it is also spelled with a
small "s." i
CHAPTER II
AN APPROACH TO THE CONCEPT OF THE SELF
I. THE CONCEPT OF THE SELF IN THE GITA i
In seeking an understanding of the self one is at- !
tenpting, in a sense, the impossible task of trying to break
through to ultimate reality. Albert C. Knudson in writing
of the nature of personality states:
Personality itself cannot be explained* It cannot be
accounted for by an analysis, by referring its origin
to simpler and anterior modes of being. It is itself
the ultimate form of reality and as such cannot be ex-
plained by anything else.*
Tl^-rererence pf_
applied with equal truth to the Eastern attitude toward the
Self. The Gita, Mahadev Desai writes, starts with accepting
certain "unanalyzable ultimates"; among these ultimates is *
the Self.2 In fact, the Gita itself claims the Self to be |
" i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e . "8 Thus it may accurately be said that |
^ Albert C. Khudson, Basic Issues in Christian
Thought, p. 75.
o
Mahadev Desai, The Gospel of Selfless Action or The
Gita According to Gandhi! p. 19. " *—
^ ^^ba 11.25 as translated by Swami Nikhilananda.
The Bhagavad Gita, p. 78.
8
nothing true can be said of the Self except the truth: "It
is.However, even though the concept of the Self cannot
be completely grasped, certain descriptions of it can be
considered both from the viewpoint of the Gita and the
Pauline epistles.
The Gita teaches that there are two selves within the
individual— a lower self and a higher Self: Compare VI.6:
"For him who has conquered his (lower self) by the (higher)
Self. ..." The lower self is only the apparent self or
the false self. Here is man as he appears to himself,and to
his world— the empirical self. From the Western viewpoint j
this lower self could be described as the psychophysical
individual^ or by the term, personality. This self may be
further designated as mind or the senses.^ Mutability and
subjection are its chief characteristics. The term—
ksetra--is often applied to this apparent self. Dasgupta
writes
. . . the word ksetra signifies in its broader sense not
only the body, but also the entire mental plane, in
volving the diverse mental functions, powers, capabili
ties, and also the undifferentiated sub-conscious
^ Ananda K. Coomaraswamy, Hinduism and Buddhism, p. 7h
5 S* Radhakrishnan. The Bhavagadgita. p. 309.
Anilbaran Roy, editor. The Message of the Gita, '
p. 59. '
9
element. In this connection it may be pointed out that
ksetra is a term which is specially reserved to denote
the coiiplex of body and mind, exclusive of the living
principle of the self, which is called ksetra-jna, or
the knower of the ksetra, or ksetrin, the possessor of
the ksetra or the body-mind complex.7
i
I The knower of the ksetra is the higher Self and the
jlatter is the chief concern of the Gita. This Self is
described as being within the "sheath" or "envelope" of the
lower self.® In the Upanishads there is found the back
ground for such a concept of the Self. Radhakri shnan in his
ianalysis of the Upanishadic teaching writes:
The Upanishads refuse to identify the self with the
body, or the series of mental states, or the presenta
tion continuum or the stream of consciousness,9
The self is the subject which persists throughout the
changes of waking, dreaming, etc. It is the person that
sees, not the object seen. It is not the bundle of
qualities called the "me" but the "I" which remains be
yond and behind inspecting all these qualities.TO
From the Upanishads themselves one learns of the Self:
That which is the finest essence . . . this whole world
has that as its soul. That is Reality. That is Atman
(Chandogya Up, 6.9.4). The Self (Atman), which is free ;
from evil, ageless, deathless, sorrowless, hungerless.
7 Surendranath Dasgupta, A History of Indian Philoso-
, II, 463, 464. --------------------- -----
8
Sri Aurobinda. Essays on the Gita, Second Series;
Revised edition, p. 386.
9 S. Radhakrishnan. The Philosophy of the Upanishads,
P* 35.
Ibid., p. 28.
10
thirstless, whose desire is the Real, Him one should
desire to understand. He obtains all worlds and all
desires who has found out and who understands that Self
(Chandogya Up. 8.7.1).
He who, dwelling in the mind yet is other than the mind
. . . who controls the mind from within . . . He is your
Soul, the Inner Controller, the Immortal (Brihad- ,
Aranyaka Up. 3.7.20).
That Soul (Atman) is not this, it is not that (neti,
net!). It is unseizable, for it is not seized. It is
indestructible, for it is not destroyed. It is unat
tached, for it does not attach itself. It is unbound.
It does not tremble. It Is not injured (Brihad-
Aranyaka 3.9*26).IT
Thus the Upanishads teach that the real Self is not mind or
personality. Compare again Chandogya Upanishad 8.7.1: "Him
one should desire to understand." Here is reference to the
Self (Him) in contrast to "one" which is the empirical self.
The former is Reality, or, in other words. Self (Atman) is
Brahman within the sheath of personality; the Self in man is
the Divine Self.
The Self is designated by a variety of terms in Hindu
thought. In relationship to prakriti (the phenomenal world
from which comes the lower, transient self or empirical
self^^) it is called Purusha or Paratman Purusa. (The two
latter terms are equivalent in meaning and refer to the
11 Robert E. Hume, The Thirteen Principal Upani shads.
Second edition, revised, pp. 2li.6, 268, 117, 125.
Dasgupta, op. cit., II,
11 ;
higher, deathless S e l f.13) In relationship to Brahman (the
Absolute, the Supreme Realityl^) it is called Atman (the in-'
dividual Self as Supreme Reality^^). In relationship to
T 6 '
ksetra it is called ksetrajna or ksetrin. At the top of |
the list of terms is that of Purushottama (The Supreme Per- !
sonl?)* At the bottom is the term jiva which is a term i
• ■ I
descriptive of the Self in its contact with the lower self |
or ego.
The Gita holds the same concept of Self as the
i
I
Up ani shads. The true Self in man is Brahaman and is called
‘ Atman:
Dwelling in each body. Brahman is called the individual
soul.19
Or "essential nature." VIII,3.
Wien we consider Brahman as lodged within the individual
being, we call Him the Atman.20
^3 Ibid., II, 466.
Nikhilananda, op. cit., p. 316.
Ibid., p. 315.
Supra, p. 9.
^7 Dasgupta, op. cit., II, 466.
Infra, p. 13.
19 Nikhilananda, op.cit.. p. 197. Translation of
VIII.3.
20
Swami Probhavananda and Christopher Isherwood,
Bhagavad-Gita. p. 95.
12
The Self is in every person: "The Lord abides in the heart
of all beings . . •"(XVIII,6l)♦ The Self is eternal:
The dweller in the body of everyone, 0 Bharata (Arjuna),
is eternal and can never be slain • ♦ . (11.30). He
(i.e., the Self) is never born, nor does he die at any
time, nor having (once) come to be does he again cease
to be. He is unborn, eternal, permanent and primeval.
He is not slain when the body is slain (11.20).
The Self is not mind/personality;
The senses, they say, are great, greater than the senses
is the mind, greater than the mind is the intelligence
but greater than the intelligence is he (III.I42).
The Self is the Witness:
The Supreme Spirit in the body is said to be the Witness,
the Permitter, the Supporter, the Bxperiencer, the Great
Lord and the Supreme Self (XIII.22).
The idea of the Witness refers to the fact that the Self is 1
the spectator who views the action of the empirical self.
He is untouched by the experiences of the individual in
which he dwells.21 He is in a real sense the core of inner
calm, the Very Person within the mutable psychophysical self |
or personality. Man’s tragedy is his unawareness of this
core of Reality— Self.
There is some type of contact between this inner Self 1
and the outer sheath of the thinking, feeling empirical
self. When the absolute Self is in such contact it is
called, as mentioned previously, jiva. Theos Bernard writes:
Dasgupta, op. cit., II, i i . 66.
13:
"When a part of the Universal Breath becomes ensconced in '
the protoplasmic environment which it animates, it is called
jiva.Or as Sri Aurobindo sets forth more fully:
The Jiva is in self-expression a portion of the
Purushottama. He represents in Nature the power of the
supreme Spirit; he is in his personality that Power; he
brings out in an individual existence the potentialitiesi
of the Soul of the universe. This J"iva itself is spirit'
and not the natural ego; the spirit and not the form of
ego is our reality and inner soul principle.23 !
The body is the scene of this contact between the
lower and the higher Self. In fact some commentators inter
pret the scene between Arjuna and Krishna on the battlefield
of Kurukshetra as a "timeless dialogue carried on in the !
recesses of every striving soul,"^^ the chariot being sym
bolic of the body of man (See Katha Upanishad 1.3.3.)#^^
The Gita thus would not disparage the physical body but would
honor it as "a vehicle for the manifestation of the Eter
nal . "26
The lower self, changing, mortal, bound, is that ;
22 The08 Bernard, Hindu Philosophy, p. 126.
23 Roy, o£. cit.. p. 238.
Sri Hamakrishna Centenary Memorial, The Cultural
Heritage of India. I, 129.
25 Nikhilananda, The Upani shads. I, 1I 4 . 8.
26 s, Radhakrishnan. The Bhavagadgita. p. 31,
I Ilf
which is usually considered as the self. But in the Gita
I
I the higher true Self which is changeless, deathless, and
free cannot be called mind, personality, empirical self,
ego, or even soul. He is God Himself: "I, 0 Gudakesa
(Arjana), am the self seated in the hearts of all crea
tures" (Gita X.EO).
Such reality is not subject to logical proof either
deductive or inductive. Hadhadkrishnan rightly states:
"Only spiritual experience can provide us with proof of the
existence of Spirit."27
II. THE CONCEPT OP THE SELF IN THE PAULINE EPISTLES
This study will now take up the concept of self as
set forth in the Pauline epistles. To formulate such a
concept involves dealing with what is perhaps the hardest
problem in the Christian religion— the " s e l f - p r o b l e m . "23
Paul does not have a completely developed doctrine of man.
And to add to the problem he uses a variety of words with a
variety of meaning to describe man. For example, the term
body (soma), is used to designate the physical organism
(Romans 8:11), the personality (Philippians 1:20), and the
27 Ibid.. p. 20.
28 Prank C. Porter, The Mind of Christ In Paul, p. 31.
15
evil force within man ("body of sin," Romans 6:6). However, I
I
Paul has preference for another term, flesh ( sarx). Thus '
' I
the latter term will be the major consideration in the fol- i
I
lowing discussion. |
I The "not-body" part of man is described by the words |
' - I
1 8oui (psyche) and spirit (pneuma). Psyche in Paul’s usage
I
refers to soul in the technical sense and not in the popular
sense of immortal spirit. Soul is the "seat of the sensa
tion, affections, desires, and p a s s i o n s ."29 it is the self-
Iconscious life within the protoplasmic structure. Thus soul
means simply "a living creature" (Cf. Romans 11:3; l6:lf).^^
However, Paul does not emphasize the tei*m psyche in his
epistles. He, in fact, retires the word to a position of
less p r o m i n e n c e . 3 I Just as he prefers the term sarx to that
of soma, so he prefers the term pneuma to that of psyche to
designate the non-physical part of man. So the discussion
of the concept of man or the self will center around the
terms sarx and pneuma, or what Paul calls the "old self" or
"old nature" (Romans 6:6; Colossians 3:9)* and the "new
29 J. Hugh Michael, The Epistle of Paul to the
Philippians, p. 66.
p. 205,
3^ Harris F. Rail, According to Paul, p. 26.
31 Ernest De Witt Burton, Spirit, Soul, and Flesh,
16
I
creature" or "new nature" (II Corinthians 5:9; Colossians !
3:10). It should be pointed out that the requirements of
this discussion will necessitate some anticipation of materi*
al in later chapters of this thesis. '
The old self or nature is dominated by flesh (sarx). i
The term, flesh, is used by Paul to refer to the physical |
body: "But to remain in the flesh is more necessary on your '
account" (Philippians 1:24) * However, this is not his major
usage of the word. It refers, in most instances, to a type
of life. The Gita teaches that there are two selves within
a given man. Paul sees two types of men: one is flesh
dominated; the other is Spirit dominated.
The one who is dominated by flesh "cannot please God" !
!
(Romans 8:8). The latter phrase is in many ways the best
definition of the flesh or the carnal self. Such a self is
not displeasing to God because he possesses a physical organ
ism. Burton emphatically states that it is wrong to assume
that Paul or any other New Testament writer believed that
"flesh is by reason of its materiality a force that makes
compellingly for evil, or that a corporeal being is by vir- !
tue of that fact a sinful b e i n g ."32 Paul, in giving a per- '
sonal word about himself to the Galatians, indicates that |
32 Ibid.. p. 207. I
17
Christ lives in him while he is still in the physical flesh
(Galatians 2:20), and the body of the new creature is said
to be the "temple of the Holy Spirit" (I Corinthians 6:19)#
Thus the physical body is actually neutral since it may be
a body of flesh or the temple of the Spirit.33
Flesh is thus not protoplasmic, but it is an inner
condition of the person which makes him out of harmony with
God (Cf. again--"cannot please God. Romans 8:8). Quimby
calls flesh "man’s lower nature as bent toward evil."34
i
George B. Stevens says that it is the "sinful principle" in
man.It is a term chiefly used, writes Irwin Edman, "to
describe human nature as such, and so used, the word with
him has a moral and religious s i g n i f i c a n c e ."36 Thus it is
that part of the total self which makes decisions contrary
to God’s will (". . . is hostile to God," Romans 8:7); it
is the focal point of ethical rebellion.
That flesh is an innate tendency or force for evil
seems to be partially substantiated by such a reference as
33 James Moffatt, The First Epistle of Paul to the
Corinthians, p. 72.
34 Chester W. Quimby, Paul for Everyone, p. 169.
35 George B. Stevens, The Pauline Theology, p. l58.
36 Irwin Edman, The Mind of Paul, p. 70.
l8
Romans 7:13: "For I know that nothing good dwells within me,
jthat is, in my flesh." Yet there is no total depravity of
human nature taught by the Apostle.37 a careful reading of
Romans 7:14-25 will indicate that the ego ("I") which per
sists through the conflict with the flesh always maintains
à hope for "good*" The "nothing good" of verse seventeen is
in the flesh and "I" know this. "I" want to do what is
right, but evil (i.e., the flesh) is always close at hand
(cf. V.21). "Who will deliver me from the body of death?"
i ,
(v.21)4 There is the ego distinguished from the body of
death or flesh.
The "I" that persists is never the subject of dis
cussion by the Apostle. He assumes a self-conscious,
decision-making ego which may be under the bondage to flesh
or may be made new in the Spirit. This "I" has the charac
teristics of the empirical self or what is popularly called
"personality," or in another context, "soul." This "I" may
also be designated "mind" since Paul indicates that the mind
may be set on the flesh or set on the Spirit; thus mind is
that persisting element (Romans 8:5)*
The "I" can become a new creation. The self "as
ultimate subject looks at the sinful self and declares it is
37 c. H. Dodd, The Epistle of Paul to the Romans,
p. 19* .............
; ' 19 I
not Itself"; "Now if I do that what I do not want, it is j
no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells within me" :
(Romans 7:20). The desire for new creaturehood is in the
ego: "I delight in the law of God in my inmost self • • !
(Romans 7:27)# "Go then, I of myself serve the law of God !
with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin"
(Romans 8:25)*
This desire of the ego is accomplished by way of a
crucifixion as Paul writes in Galatians 2:20:
I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who
live, but Christ who lives in me; and the life I now
live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who
loved me and gave himself for me.
Note the persistence of the "I" through the crucifixion
process. If it were possible to illustrate the change from
flesh to spirit, one' would see the ego/mind/flesh passing
through the field of the cross. Ego/mind remains, but flesh
has been "filtered out" of the ego make-up just as the
proper electronic apparatus might filter out discordant
sounds, and there remains ego/mind/Spirit. Or since ego/
mind is equivalent to the natural pneuma, the result could
be indicated as spirit/Spirit (pneuma/Pneuma). The "Spirit
dwells within you" (Romans 8:9); the ego or pneuma has "put
3o Re inhold Niebuhr, The Nature and Destiny of Man,
I, 278.
20
!
on the Lord Jesus Christ" (Romans 13:l4)* God as Spirit has;
come to live within: "For we are the temple of God; as God
said, *I will live in them • . •*" (II Corinthians 6:l6).
Of course, it is true as E. P. Scott points out that '
this change is more than a "moral renewal. "39 But this
i ' i
Ichange is not a change in essence. The Spirit dwells in the
ego and operates in the ego. This divine pneuma may per
meate and dominate the human pneuma, but in Paul * s teaching
there can be no such equation descriptive of the post-
I
crucifixion life as ego/pneuma equals God/Pneuma. God in
the Spirit/Christ may live in the ego, but they are never
identified. Note again Galatians 2:20: . . Christ who
lives in me . . ." (Italics are not in the original).
Actually the change is a moral renewal in this sense;
it is not just of the "I’s" doing, but is the result of what
Quimby calls a "divine invasion" by the Spirit of God.^^ |
I
The moral renewal that follows the working of the indwelling
Spirit is not the result of "any transmutation of human sub
stance, but from the striking down of sin in the flesh.
39 E. F. Scott, The Spirit in the New Testament,
p. 139.
Quimby, op. cit., p. 2L.#
^ W. Morgan, The Religion and Theology of Paul,
p. l6l.
21
Such a striking down enables God by His Spirit to pour out
His love through the ego (Romans The ego is renewed
or reconstructed after the image of God (Golossians 3:10).
jit is noted that the ego is after the image of God; it does
not become God. This renewal is in the image of the charac-
Iter attributes of God: **• . . compassion, kindness ♦ . .
love ...” (Golossians 3îl2-lk)* These terms describe the
”new nature" which the individual has "put on" (Golossians
; -
3:10).
I When the teaching of Paul has been added up, the self
lor ego is seen to have undergone no change in essence in the
conversion experience (i.e., self in man remains humane it
does not become divine Self). The change is one of sover
eignty. The ego may be "enslaved to sin" (Romans 6:6), i.e.,
the flesh, and may thus be revealing the image of the flesh !
which is hostile to God; or the ego may be under the ruler- ,
ship of Christ (Galatians 2:20), and thus be revealing the
image of Spirit/Christ (the terms are equivalent in Paulfs
thinking^) which fundamentally is love.
Burton, 02# cit., p.
22
III. SUMMARY A m COMPARISON
The Gita teaches that there are two selves within
man: a lower or apparent self which is the empirical self or,
ego and the higher or true Self which is Brahmari/Krishna.
The empirical self is the arena for all of the experiences
of life. It is subject to all changes including death.
Basing its concepts on the Upanishads. the Gita
teaches that man is more than what is designated mind, ego,
or personality. Within the sheath of the letter the true
1
Self dwells untainted by the experiences of that apparent
self. The true Self is the persisting Reality. It is not
in bondage as is the ego, and it is deathless. Human Self
as Divine Self is in every person at all times. Man’s major
concern should be the discovery of the Divine Self within
him.
in the Pauline epistles two types of persons are
described: one is dominated by flesh and the other is domi
nated by Spirit. However, in both types there is the same
persisting ego. This ego, although not too clearly de
scribed by the Apostle, is the empirical self or personality^
Thus for Paul the empirical self is the true self.
The empirical self is eternal, but it needs to be
reconstructed by divine power from without. The Divine Self
is not already within as the Gita teaches. Furthermore,
23 ,
!
even with the entrance of the Spirit of God, the human ego
and the Divine Self do not become one in essence. The
Spirit/Christ dwells within the self but is not the self.
This indwelling Spirit effects an ethical change.
The ego which was dominated by flesh now comes under the
control of Spirit. The change from the old nature to the
new creation is not a change in essential nature, but an
ethical reorientation of the persisting ego. Such reorien
tation is not possible unless divine help comes from with-
I
out. Again recall that the Gita teaches that the Divine
I Self is already within man.
Every person already possesses the Divine Self ac
cording to the Gita, whereas the Pauline epistles set forth
the necessity for a crucifixion of the flesh before it is
possible for God to come and dwell in the ego.
Neither the Gita nor the "Epistles" disparage the
physical body, nor believe that materiality as such is evil.
The body is neutral. It may be subject to the lower self
or flesh or may be the vehicle for the higher Self or Spirit/
Christ.
CHAPTER III !
THE MEANING OP SEEP-REALIZATION
I. THE MEANING AS SET FORTH IN THE GITA
: A partial description and definition of the self has i
been given in Chapter One, The practical question now pre
sents itself, namely, "What is the purpose and goal for this
self?" For both the teachings being considered in this
thesis the question might well be answered by Radhakrishnan
who states: "The problem that human life sets to us is to
discover our true self and live according to its truth. . ."i
This discovery of the true self is the concept of
self-realization set forth in the Gita. Man must become
what he is in reality: Atman/Brahman. Because he is essen
tially the latter, self-realization may rightly be called
"God-realization.
Man in his appearance, in his personality, is not
self; but he possesses Self and his goal is to become Self.3
This becoming of Self, which is discovering the oneness or
^ S. Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita, p. 365*
2
Sri Ramakrishna Centenary Memorial, The Cultural
Heritage of India. I, ll|,3.
3 Radhakrishnan, op. cit., p. 55.
25 i
union of the individual self with the Cosmic Self, is called!
yoga. Yoga is the key word of the Gita.4
He who knows in truth the glory and power of Mine is I
united (with Me) by unfaltering yoga: of this there is
no doubt (Gita X.7).
To these who are in constant union with Me and worship ,
Me with love, I grant the power of understanding by
which they come unto Me (Gita X.IO). !
' " ' I
Yoga, or union with God, may be viewed under two as
pects: the negative aspect is called moksha and the positive
aspect is called samadhi or ananda.
I
^ Liberation is the meaning of the term moksha. That
inexorable law of karma^ has determined a cycle of rebirths
for man "tyrannized over by this appearance of nature. . ."6
This cycle is called samsara. Man’s longing is for wisdom
which will secure his release from samsara. The Gjta re
veals such wisdom:
I shall again declare that supreme wisdom, of all wisdom
the best, by knowing which all sages have passed from '
this world to the highest perfection. Having resorted
to this wisdom and become of like nature to Me, they are
not born at the time of creation; nor are they disturbed|
at the time of dissolution (Gita XIV.1,2).
The one united with God is free. He is called the liberated
4 Sri Ramakrishna Centenary Memorial, op. cit., I,
121.
? Infra, p.
/ ^ Anhilbaran Roy, editor. The Message of the Gita,
p. iQl.
26
I
man "who has exalted himself into the divine nature. . . ."7'
!
I In the Gita there is found the paradox of necessity
and freedom. However, the Gita clearly shows that it is
I
only the false self that is bound by necessity; the true I
Self is free. |
I
i . . . everyone made to act helplessly by the impulses |
born of nature (Italics not in the original)(Gita 111.5%;
The soul in union with the Divine attains to peace well-
founded . . . but he whose soul is not in union with the
Divine is impelled by desire, and is attached by the
fruit (of action) and is (therefore) bound (Gita V.2).
\
I A
Samadhi is the term used to designate the positive
aspect of the state of union with the Supreme Self. The one
who has achieved samadhi/ananda is "possessed of the Self" ^
(Gita II.I4. 5). He has reached the "sorrowless state" (Gita
11.55). He has found "happiness that is in the Self. Such
a one who is in union with God enjoys undying bliss" (Gita
V. 21). Above all he has become "stable in spirit {samadhi}"
and thus is "established in the Self alone . . . harmonized
(in yoga)" (Gita VI.18). Thus the core of inner calm which
is the Reality of the union has been discovered within the
sheath of the ego or personality. All bi-polar tension.
7 Ibid.. p. 56.
3 Samadhi, as used In the Gita, does not refer prl-
marily to mental discipline, but to the "calm, desireless,
griefless fixity of the buddhi in self-poise and self-know
ledge. . . The latter is also descriptive of ananda.
Ibia.^,__p.
27
I
conflicts, and fears have ceased in the consciousness of the
I Supreme Self. I
The realization of the Self in moksha and samadhi cah
be attained while still living in the physical body since in
the Gita there is taught "no antithesis between eternity and!
; time;one can while living in the world of time "possess |
the immortality of timeless self-existence."^^ In fact, one'
of the Gita’s chief emphases is that one does not have to
leave the world either by trance or death to discover his
real Self.
I
! Yoga may be attained now (i.e., before death) and the
one united with God is told he has a right to work in this
life; he is not to remain Inactive. "To action alone hast
thou a right and never at all to its fruits; let not the
fruits of action be thy motive; neither let there be in thee
any attachement to inaction."(Gita II.%7).
One of the most profound discussions in the Gita is
this matter of work or action; "How can we live in the High-I
est Self and yet continue to work in the world?The
answer is quite clear: the important thing to consider in
9 Radhakr!shnan, op. cit.. p. 38.
S. Radhakr ishnan, Indian Philosophy, I, 5k8.
S. Radhakrishnan. The BhagavadRita, p. 13.
28 ,
work is not the work itself hut that which motivates the ^
work. If one works with no desire for the results, that !
I i
work will not hinder Self-realization, but will be a means |
of achieving it. |
You have a right to work, but for the work’s sake only. ‘
You have no right to the fruits of work. Desire for thej
fruits of work must never be your motive in working.
Never give way to laziness, either. Perform every ac
tion with your heart fixed on the Supreme Lord. Re
nounce attachement to the fruits. 12
Self-realization does result from such work: "...
iperforming actions for My sake, thou shalt attain perfec
tion" (Gita XII.10).
Although the Gita teaches that the state of moksha/
samadhi may be reached before death, there are a number of
references which seem to indicate that there are phases of
the ultimate goal which are entered into only after death.
Note in the following references the need of leaving the
body is stressed in order to reach Brahman:
And whoever, at the time of death, gives up his body and
departs, thinking of Me alone, he comes to My status '
(of being); of that there is no doubt (Gita VIII.5).13
He who knows thus in its true nature My divine birth and
works, is not born again, when he leaves his body but
comes to me, 0 Arjuna (Gita IV.9)*
12 Swami Prabhavananda and Christopher Isherwood,
Bhagavad-Gita, p. i^6.
13 Swami Niki 1 ananda. The Bhagavad Gita, p. 198. Of.
translation of VIII.5.
29
In XV.6. reference is made to "My supreme abode from
which those who reach it never return." This supreme abode i
is not some type of Semitic heaven since entering into the ;
latter results, not in moksha, but in rebirth (samsara): '
. . enjoy in heaven the pleasures of the gods. Having I
enjoyed the spacious world of heaven, they enter (return to)i
the world of mortals . . ." (Gita IX.20,21). |
The supreme abode is called Nirvana. There is not
agreement among the commentators on the Gita on the question
Lf whether Nirvana means the annihilation or the persistence '
of individuality. M. Hiriyanna states: "The absolutist view
decides against persistence; the purely theistic view in
favor of it."l4 Aurobindo is sure that "Nirvana is not the i
negative self-annihilation of the buddhists, but the great
immergeno6 of the separate personal self into the vast realil
ty of one infinite Impersonal Existence."1^ It is not ;
an exclusion and negating extinction of all that we are
here, but . . . an exclusion and negating extinction of
ignorance and ego and consequent ineffable fulfilment
of our knowledge and will and heart’s aspiration, an upr
lifted and limitless living of them in the Divine,.,."lb
Prabhavananda gets at the heart of the Gita’s teach
ing when he writes:
M, Hiriyaima, Outlines of Indian Philosophy, p. 12&
Roy, op. cit., p. i | . 5 .
^ ■ ♦ — — ■ ' — — — — - — — — - _ . _ ... — - — ■ - - . —.
30 I
Nirvana or self-extinction in Brahman clearly implies '
extinction of the ego, the false self, in the higher
spiritualized Self • . • One no longer identifies one
self with the limitations of the body, the senses or
the mind, but unites oneself in the consciousness with
Brahman, the all-pervading and divine existence.17
Thus Nirvana is the complete realization of the true Self in
Brahman (cf. ". . . Nirvana in the Brahman,” Oita V.26),^^ j
it is the attainment of perfection (cf. Gita XII.IO). The ,
perfected one has done with all becoming; the individual I
Self is at last complete in the Supreme S e l f.19
In Nirvana the physical body is of no consequence so
there is no promised resurrection of the body. It is the
in^erishable Self that alone is eternal:
He (the Self) is never born, nor does he die at any '
time, nor having (once) come to be does he again cease
to be. He is unborn, eternal, permanent and primeval.
He is not slain when the body is slain (Gita 11.20).
As one does not find in the immortality of Nirvana the per
fecting of the physical body, neither does he find the per
fecting of the mind or that which is popularly known as |
personality.
For by immortality is meant not the survival of death
. . . that is already given to every creature born with
a mind . , . but the transcendence of life and death.
17 Swami Prabhavananda, Vedic Religion and Philosophy*
p. i4o. ---------- -----------------
1^ Hoy, op. cit., p. 89.
19 Ananda Coomaraswamy, Hinduism and Buddhism, p. 6 i | . , :
3X ,
It means that ascension by which man ceases to live as '
a mind-info m e d body and lives at last as spirit in the
Spirit.20
Thus Self-realization is not personality-fulfilment but God-:
realization. |
II. THE MEANING AS SET FORTH IN THE PAULINE EPISTLES i
i
The Gita teaches that in the process of Self-realiza
tion man becomes what he essentially is. In contrast the
Pauline epistles teach that "man must become what he was
I not, a ’new creature in Christ Jesus,’"^1 The latter phrase,
"in Christ," together with the expression, "with Christ,"
sum up the Apostle’s meaning of self-realization.
In the Pauline epistles the phrase "in Christ" occurs
I6I 4. times; it is in a real sense the characteristic expres
sion of Pauline Christianity.^^ Cognate ideas to that of
"in Christ" include "Christ liveth in me" (cf. Gal. 2:20),
and "in the Spirit" (cf. Romans 8:9). There is no clear
differentiation made between these various expressions.^3 |
Sri Aurobindo, Essays on the Gita, p. 56#
Mary Edith Andrews, The Ethical Teaching of Paul,
p# 35. ----------------------------- -
22
Adolph Beissman, The Religion of Jesus and the
Faith gf Paul, p. 17I#
^3 Ernest W. Parsons, The Religion of the New Testâ
mes, p. 97.
32
It has been pointed out in Chapter Two of this the-
sis^4 that the person not "in Christ" is under the sover
eignty of the flesh. Flesh designates a type of life which
is hostile to God; it does not refer to the physical organ
ism as such (Romans 8:7*8, cf. verse 9)* lu conversion the
I
ego/personality/natural pneuma passes through the filtering
power of the cross so that the sovereignty of the flesh is
removed and the sovereignty of the Spirit established. The
ego/personality/natural pneuma (spirit) is now under the
control of the Divine Pneuma (Spirit).
The individual in Christ, possessed of the Spirit, is ;
called a new creature: . . if any one is in Christ, he is
a new creation" (Footnote: "creature," II Corinthians 5:17)# !
But what is the meaning of "new creation"? Quimlby believes
that a person who is a new creature is more than a changed
man; he is "another man.Pfleiderer holds to the view
I
that the Divine Pneuma and the natural human pneuma coalesce
into the "unity of a new subject.Scott, in de
scribing the results of the possession of the Spirit upon
human nature, sees such a profound change that he calls it
24 Supra, p. 16.
Chester W. %uimby, Paul for Everyone. p. 25#
Otto Pfleiderer, Paullnism. I, 215.
33 ,
being transmuted "into something higher" share in I
the very nature of God."28
The state of new creaturehood is related to posses- ,
Sion of the Spirit. But what is the exact relationship of |
the Spirit/Christ to the individual? What does Paul mean by
his teaching on the union of the pneuma with the Pneuma, or,
in other words, what is the nature of Pauline mysticism?
There have been many differences of opinion in regard to
this question. At one extreme is the teaching of the schol
ars just mentioned (for example, E. P. Scott); at the other
extreme is the belief of Johannes Weiss who states that in
vestigators have exaggerated the meaning of Pauline mysti
cism. Instead of teaching the individual is completely
fused with Christ in the mystical union, the Apostle actu
ally teaches, states Weiss, that the one "in Christ" is that
one who is serving the Divine Master with complete devotion
and with complete dependence,^9
Now it is true that the state of being "in Christ" is
^7 E. P. Scott, The Spirit in the New Testament,
p. 130. "
28
E. P. Scott, The Epistles of Paul to the Golossians,
to Philemon, and to the Ephesians, p. 3ÇT
29 Johannes Weiss, The History of Primitive Chris
tianity, I, pp. 4^9-i|.71.
3%i
I
one In which the convert has surrendered his ego/mind to the
Master (cf. Philippians 2:5f)# And the result of such sur- ;
render is a life possessed by Spirit/Christ and described
I
by the terms, "love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, good- *
ness, faithfulness, gentleness, self control • . |
; (Galatians 5:22). Obviously these terms are descriptive of |
I
conduct. Thus the union with Christ may be called one of
moral renewal. The convert feels himself to be living in
such intimate fellowship and his whole life so under divine
I
control that he conceives Spirit/Christ "to be resident in
'him, imparting to him impulse and power, transforming him
morally. . . ."30 p. C. Porter writes of this ethical re
newal:
The oneness of the Christian with Christ is the oneness
of love; it is therefore not physical in nature. It is
a oneness like friendship, not the oneness of the blend
ing of physical elements, or the transformation of one
element into a n o t h e r .3L
However, although the union of the individual with
Spirit/Christ is moral through and through, it is surely
more than Just that; i.e., it is more than the mere appro
priation of the attitude and spirit of Christ.32 There is
3^ Ernest De Witt Burton, A Critical and Exegetical
Commentary on the Epistle to the"^Galatians, p. 137.
31 Frank C. Porter, The Mind of Christ in Paul, p. 77#;
32 Elias Andrews, The Meaning of Christ for Paul, p.
--------- 35 ^
the impact of a life upon a life,— the passing of a '
life into a life,— a thing which defies analysis, but
which is related to moral action as being to doing, or
as nature to character.33 I
1
In Golossians Paul writes: '
For in him (Christ) dwells the whole fulness of deity j
bodily, and you have come to fulness of life in him
. . . (Golossians 2:9,10).
For you have died, and your life is hid with Christ in I
God (Golossians 3:3).
These references seem to indicate that Paul assumes
that his converts would have an immediate awareness of God
in Christ;34 a spiritual union in which the Divine Pneuma
and the human pneuma meet. This does not mean that the
I i
Pauline epistles teach any place that the individual nature i
|becomes merged with that of C h r i s t ;35 nor that there is any j
annihilation of the individual personality nor of personal !
responsibility. Yet there is a "divine energy infused into
m e n " 36 so that it can be said of the convert that he is
"dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus" (Romans 6:11).!
33 James M. Campbell, Paul the Mystic, p. 70. [
' 34 Paul never speaks of being one with God; his mys
ticism is rather mediated through Christ, a Christ-mystic ism.
Albert Schweitzer, The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle. p. 5. |
35 Campbell, op. cit.♦ p. 68.
36 p. Scott, The Spirit in the New Testament. |
p. l4i* i
Irwin Edman gives an excellent synthesis of the two views on|
the nature of the union with Christ when he states: "This
I
being-in-Christ is for Paul at once a psychological sense of
immediacy of Christ’s indwelling presence, and an identifi- j
cation through behaviour."37 |
i There is more to the Pauline teaching on union with |
i
Christ than that discussed up to this point. In addition to
' individual oneness with Christ there is a corporate oneness
I in the fellowship, the church. Christ is the head of the
jchurch, the church being depicted as the body (Golossians
By one Spirit we were all baptized into one body . . .
i (I Corinthians 12:13).
I . . . so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and
individually one of another (Romans 12:5)#
Note also the Apostle in referring to the church calls it
I the temple of God/Spirit (I Corinthians 3:16). Dodd says
of this corporate union:
I Paul’s sense of union with Christ is conditioned by the !
! experience of life in a society controlled by His Spirit!
I . . . . It is a sense of being included in the ’corporate
personality’ of Christ which is manifest in the Church. |
(To be in Christ depends) on action fellowship with j
others who are also ’members of Christ. ’ That is not to!
deny the deep inwardness of the relation for every in- '
dividual ’member.’ In each ’member’ as in the whole '
Body, Christ lives and works.38
pj. -88.
37 Irwin Edman, The Mind of Paul, pp. I63, l61^.
C. H. Dodd, The Epistle of Paul to the Romans,
37
I
Thus self-realization by the possession of Spirit/
Christ is the individual’s awareness of divine presence, the
empowerment of the individual for ethical living, and a cor
porate union in fellowship with the Head of the Church.
Such self-realization is possible before death since one is !
I "in Christ" from the moment of baptism: "For as many of you
I
as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ" (Galatians |
I
3:27). Note also in Galatians 2:20, the key-verse in under
standing self-realization in the Pauline epistles, that Paul
!
jstates that he still lives in the flesh yet Christ lives in
him,
"In Christ" is the first phase of self-realization; |
"with Christ" designates the complete process. The higher
state of being "with Christ" requires the death of the in
dividual or the Parousia of Christ* There are at least two
factors which prevent attaining total self-realization be
fore one of the latter events. First of all, the desire of
Christ for the individual is "to present you holy and blame
less and irreproachable before him . . ."(Golossians 1:22).
Such a condition is impossible before death. There is still
striving to achieve perfection:
Not that I have already obtained this or am already per
fect; but I press on to make it my own, because Christ
Jesus has made me his own. Brethren, X do not consider
that I have made it my own; but one thing I do, forgett
ing what lies behind and straining forward to what lies
ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the
38 I
upward call of God In Christ Jesus (Philippians 3:l2-ll^).
I
|The human pneuma may be possessed by the Divine Pneuma but '
1 ^
the former can be still defiled (cf. II Corinthians 7:1: |
i I
i " . . . let us cleanse ourselves from every defilement of j
body and spirit. . . ."). The process of perfection is |
going on, and it is not to be completed until the "day of j
! Jesus Christ" (Philippians 1:6). !
I
I A second requirement for self-realization which a-
! I
waits death or the Parousia is the resurrection of the body
land entrance into the Kingdom of God; "... flesh and blood
I cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable j
IInherit the imperishable" (I Corinthians 15:50). The in- ,
dividual waits for the redemption of his body (Romans 8:23)
when it shall undergo that change from a perishable to an
I
I imperishable nature (cf. also I Corinthians 15:53)* For
I
Paul "life without a body is unthinkable. . , ."39 So he
teaches that the "indwelling Spirit is the guarantee that a
new body will be given to the Christian in the future : "4^
For we know that if the earthly tent we live in is de
stroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made
with hands, eternal in the heavens . . . He who has pre
pared us for this very thing is God, who has given us
the Spirit as a guarantee (II Corinthians 5:1*5).
39 Scott, 0£. cit., p. 145.
40 Mary Edith Andrews, cit. , p. 67.
39 :
Thus it seems quite clear in examing the epistles of Paul !
that there can be no completed self-realization until the
individual has a resurrection body and has reached Heaven;4^
. • . that I may know him and the power of his resurrec-!
tion that if possible I may attain the resurrection from'
the dead , . • our commonwealth is in heaven, and from |
it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will ;
change our lowly body to be like his glorious body , . . '
(Philippians 3:10,11,20,21).
Self-realization "in Christ" and "with Christ" can be
summarized under the one term, sons hip :
I . . . for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God . . .
(Galatians 3:25).
And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his
I Son into our hearts . . . (Galatians i|.:6).
For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of |
God . • . (Romans 8:lq.).
' I
This sonship brings spiritual freedom so that sin no longer ,
has sovereignty over the individual and death is no longer
jf eared: j
i For freedom Christ has set us free . . , (Galatians 5:1),
. . . where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom !
(II Corinthians 3:17). |
I For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has |
set me free from the law of sin and death (Romans 8:2). |
For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain
, (Philippians 1:21).
I I
'Self-realization is in sonship in which there can be the .
I !
jtotal fulfilment of the potentialities of the self. |
I Paul’s concept of Heaven may be eschatological in
nature rather than a post-death state. See Schweitzer, op.
cit., p. 65f.
------------- . I
ko j
III. SUMMARY AMD COMPARISON I
I
I
j This chapter has set forth the concept of what is '
I real for the self in the context of the Gita and of the j
I !
'Pauline epistles. The Gita teaches that in Self-realization!
I I
I the individual discovers what he actually is, namely not I
personality, ego, or mind but Atman/Brahman. The real Self
1
I within man is the Cosmic Self. Yoga is the term applied to '
I the realization of this union.
Negatively, yoga is moksha, the liberation from
isamsara which is the cycle of rebirth. In such liberation
! !
the individual finds the freedom which does not exist in the
realm of the false or apparent self* Samadhi or ananda is i
I
the positive aspect of yoga. The individual in discovering '
his real Self has discovered the core of inner calm which
brings inexpressible bliss and thus the relief from tensions
and conflicts. I
One is not to wait for death to achieve yoga; neither
is he to withdraw from the world of action. Fulfillment is '
possible now and in one’s work. However, one is no longer |
to work in order to enjoy the fruit of it; work is to be done
with no thought of the results knowing that the Supreme Self;
is the doer. j
I
Although Self-realization is possible before death, i
the Gita indicates that the completion of the process awaits
lA
death since it is at death the one who has discovered his
real Self goes to Brahman. There is no agreement on the
question of whether or not going to the Supreme Self— Nir
vana— means the annihilation or the persistence of individu
ality. However, it would seem that it is only the false
self that suffers extinction. The true Self lives on, not
as mind nor as personality, but as true Spirit. Neither a
resurrection nor a physical heaven is the object of Self-
realization in the Gita.
I
There is a profound contrast in the matter of self-
'realization between the Gita and the Pauline epistles. The
latter do not teach that the individual discovers his real
I
jself within; he does not become what he essentially is. The
individual must become something he was not, namely, a new
jcreature by the coming of the Spirit/Christ from without the
individual to take up residence within him. No transmuta- ;
!
tion of the individual’s essential nature is taught. The i
individual is aware of the indwelling presence of Spirit/ i
Christ; but he does not become Christ. Actually the newness;
results when the ego submits to the new divine sovereign.
jBefore conversion the sovereign is flesh (that principle in
i
life which is hostile to God); after conversion it is the |
iSpirit, or the heavenly Christ, which rules the qgo. The |
latter persists through the change of sovereignty as it is !
: " ' 4 2 i
indicated in Galatians 2:20. Self-realization is awareness !
of this divine presence; it is also ethical re-orientation '
I I
under the sovereignty of the Spirit; hut it is in addition
■coroprate oneness in the fellowship of the church.
Self-realization, in one sense, may be achieved now; j
I yet the total process awaits either the death of the in- !
dividual or the Parousia of Christ. Complete realization j
of the self requires a blamelessness only possible "with
Christ," and a new body in a new environment. Heaven, which
i
obviously is not possible before death or the Parousia. The
Gita rejects the concept of resurrection and a heaven as
necessary for Self-realization.
"In Christ" and "with Christ" which cover the teach- !
ing on self-realization in the Pauline epistles may be sum
marized by the one term, "Sonship." !
The yogin of the Gita rids himself of ego in discover^
I
ing Self; the convert in the Pauline teaching keeps his ego ;
but under the sovereignty of Spirit/Christ. The Gita j
I
teaches that Atman (Self) is Brahman. In the Pauline con- I
text the human self never becomes the Divine Self, i.e., ^
I
Spirit/Christ. Both Gita and the Pauline epistles teach |
that death is of no consequence and thus is not to be feared*
It is certain that Self-realization in the Gita can- I
not be described as personality-fulfillment since personality
43
Is not the real Self. The Pauline epistles, although
.stressing the persistence of the ego, teach that the latter
I
or natural pneuma cannot find its fulfillment until the
(Divine Pneuma indwells it. In personality-fulfillment the
desire is to find the potential of the natural pneuma, an
idea foreign to both documents being considered in this
thesis.
CHAPTER IV
OBSTACLES TO SELF-REALIZATION
I. OBSTACLES AS DEFINED IN THE GITA
I
! Thé, discussion in this chapter will be concerned with
Ithe concept of evil in the Gita and in the Pauline epistles.
What constitutes evil in each of these contexts? What is
the punishment for this evil?
Ignorance^ and desires are the two basic evils empha
sized in the Gita. Ignorance is "not intellectual error but
is spiritual blindness."2 In other words, it is not a fail
ure in academic learning, but a failure in spiritual percep
tion; it is "the root evil."3 The ignorant person does not
know the true Self/Atman dwelling within him. 4 He believes
that he as ego/mind is the godhead:
’This today has been gained by me: this desire I shall
attain, this is mine and this wealth also shall be mine
(in future). This foe is slain by me and others also I
shall slay, I am the lord, I am the en joyer, I am suc
cessful, mighty and happy, I am rich and well-born.
^ The term, ajana, is used in the Gita rather than
the term avidya. S. Dasgupta, A History of Indian Philoso-
■ II, 1 4 : 98, 499. "
^ S. RadHakrlshnan, The Bhagavadglta« p. 52.
3 Ibid.. p. 70.
4 Swami Nlkhilananda, The Kiagavad Gita, p. l4k.
It
45 ,
Who Is there like unto me? I shall sacrifice, I shall
give, I shall rejoice,’ thus they (say), deluded by ;
I ignorance (Gita XVÏ.13-1S). !
Since in ignorance such an individual believes that he ac
complishes all things, he despises the Supreme Self;
Given over to self-conceit, force and pride and also to '
lust and anger, these malicious people déspise Me dwell
ing in the bodies of themselves and others (Gita XVI.I8);
This ignorance is responsible for work which enslaves; i.e.,
work done with attachment, demanding the fruits thereof:
he whose soul is not in union with the Divine is im
pelled by desire, and is attached to the fruit (of action)
and is (therefore) bound" (Gita V.12).
Ignorance is the result of maya. The term, maya, is
!
used in Chapter VII.13*15 of the Gita and is translated--
"delusion" or "illusion." The Gita by using such a term
does not mean that the world has merely an "illusory appear
ance," but it is used in the sense of "an inscrutable power ,
of ignorance. This ignorance is manifested in that "ten
dency to identify ourselves with our apparent self. . . .
Maya is intangible; it cannot be grasped by reason, for
reasoning itself is maya. To try to prove maya by
reasoning is like trying to see darkness by means of
darkness. Again, maya cannot be proved by Knowledge,
for when Knowledge is awakened there remains no trace of
5 Dasgupta, op. cit., II, 487.
^ S. Radhakrishnan. Eastern Religions and Western
Thought, p. 28.
46
maya* Hence It will remain forever inscrutable to the
human mind* 7
The Gita speaks of maya thus:
The Evil doers who are foolish, low in the human scale,
whose minds are carried away by illusion and who par**
take of the nature of demons do not seek refuge in Me
(Gita VII.l5)* Nikhilananda translates a portion of
this verse as "deprived of knowledge by maya.
The knowledge mentioned in the last reference is knowledge
of Reality. Those not enlightened grope in the "slough of
delusion";9 they are enslaved rather than free.
The delusion (maya) which is the cause of evil is
further described as being due to the three gunas:
Deluded by these threefold modes of nature (gunas) this
whole world does not recognize Me who am above them and
ia^erishable (Gita VII.13). The three modes (gunas),
goodness (sattva), passion (rajas), and dullness (tamas)
born of nature (prakriti) bind down in the body, 0
Mighty**armed (Arjuna), the imperishable dweller in the
body (Gita XIV.5).
These three modes or gunas proceed from prakriti (i.e.,
i
maya; the terms are Interchangeable).^^ Prakriti is the |
7 Hikhilananda, op. cit., p. I89.
^ hoc, cit.
^ Gita 11*^2 as translated by S. Hikhilananda, ibid.,
p. 91. ’
10
Swami Prabhavanda and Christopher Isherwood,
Bhagavad**Gita, p. 182. Gunas are "determinates of the ten
dencies of, or rather the stuff of, the moral and immoral, |
pleasurable and painful planes or characteristics of our j
experience." Dasgupta, op. cit. # II, I 4 . 7O.
47,
cause of all material phenomena and is constituted as the !
three forces or gunas. It is non-Self; i.e., it is not ;
Purusa.^1 The evil in man is due to his identification with
the lower gunas: rajas which move the individual to egotis- I
tic action and tamas which blinds the individual and binds
j
him down with carelessness, idleness, and s l e e p .12 Although;
I
sattwa enables the individual to go beyond the lower gunas
to freedom, yet it too must be transcended. It might be
called the doorway from the apparent self to the Atman.
Thus all gunas are to be left behind in the progress from
evil (state of knowing only the apparent self) to Self-
realization:
When the embodied soul rises above these three modes
that spring from the body, it is freed from birth,
death, old age and pain and attains life eternal (Gita
XIV.20). ;
Radhadkrishnan gives a good summary of evil in relationship
to the gunas: j
When the soul identifies itself with the modes of nature,
it forgets its own eternity and uses mind, life and body;
for egoistic satisfaction. To rise above bondage, we
must rise above the modes of nature . . . then we put on
the free and incorruptible nature of spirit*13
Closely related to the root evil of ignorance is
desire. Desire is basically the ego coveting for
Nikhilananda, o£* cit., p. 105
12 Dasgupta, o£. cit., II, J 4 . 62. Basguptia, o£. C i t . , ii,
^3-Radhakri shnan, The Bhaga vadg i t a p. 31?
48 ,
satisfaction in the senses: '
#ien the mind runs after the roving senses, it carries
away the understanding, even as a wind carries away a !
ship on the waters (Gita II.67).
Therefore, 0 Best of Bharatas (Arjuna), control thy
senses from the beginning and slay this sinful destroyer
of wisdom and discrimination (Gita III.I4.I).
Aurobindo writes:
I
Desire, if permitted to remain under whatever colour, '
is a perpetual menace even to the wisest and can at any
moment subtly or violently cast down the mind from even
its firmest and most surely acquired foundation. Desire
is the chief enemy of spiritual perfection.14
iIt is only when desire of the ego is overcome that one can
possibly attain to the Reality of the Self in samadhi:
When a man puts away the desires of his mind • . . and
when his spirit is content in itself, then he is called
stable in intelligence (Gita 11.55)*
It should be noted that the Gita lists the desire for
heaven among the evil desires (See Gita 11.1^3).
A catalogue of specific sins is given in Chapter XVI.
10-18. Issuing from the basic evils of ignorance (delusion)!
and desire (attachment) are hypocrisy, pride, arrogance,
anxiety, anger, covetousness, injustice, obstinacy, and
egotism. The latter sin is that attempt of the individual
to make himself the godhead (Cf. again XVI. 13-15)
1^ Sri Aurobindo, Essays on the Gita, Second Series,
Revised edition, p. ii.25#
Radhakrishnan, cit., p. 338.
49 i
The punishment for the evils of ignorance and de
sire— since because of them the individual fails to find the
knowledge of the Self— is the cycle of rebirth, i.e., samsara
(cf. Gita XVI.19):
. these deluded beings . . . do not attain to Me |
• (Gita XVI.20). Men . . . not attaining to Me i
. . . return to the path of mortal living (samsara) |
(Gita IX.3).
These individuals who are in the cycle of rebirth are help
less since they are under the control of prlkriti (Gita.
|IX.8).
Samsara is due to the working of karma which is the
1
I I
process of cause and effect in the phenomenal world; it is
the harvest springing from an individual *s own actions: |
"whatever a man reaps, that must he have sown. Thus man '
bound by ignorance and desires in the phenomenal world is
helpless under the force of karma until he transcends the :
natural order and reaches the realm of freedom in the Self !
where karma does not o p e r a t e .^7
II, OBSTACLES AS DEFINED IN THE PAULINE EPISTLES
The obstacles to self-realization as set forth in the
Pauline epistles may be summarized in the term, flesh. In
John McKenzie, Hindu Ethics, p. 217.
^7 Radhakrishnan, o£* cit., p. 70
50;
Chapter Two of this thesis^^ it was necessary to discuss the
meaning of this term in relationship to the concept of the |
self, but it will be necessary for the purposes of this
Chapter to consider further the Pauline significance of the :
term. j
I
Flesh in its relationship to the question of sin does
not refer primarily to the physical body. Joseph Klausner
states that the "most dreadful teaching of Paul" is that
for him the flesh (physical body) and sin are identified.^9
But the Apostle has been misrepresented in such a statement.
He very clearly states that Christ lives in his physical
body (Galatians 2:20) and that the body is the "temple of
I
the Holy Spirit" (I Corinthians 6:19). Flesh is thus to be ;
viewed as the seat of evil; it may be identified with "base
mind" (Romans 1:28). Flesh is a way of life issuing from a
mind turned toward earthly things and away from God:^0
!
For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God;!
it does not submit to God*s law, indeed it cannot; and
those who are in the flesh cannot please God (Romans i
8:7).
Supra., p. l6.
^9 Joseph Klausner, From Jesus to Paul, p. 522.
Harris F. Rail, According to Paul, p. 30.
51 '
Flesh is thus that area^l within the individual’s total make
up which is inclined to make decisions contrary to God’s
will.
Such wrong decisions are not made because of ignor- ;
ance. Paul indicates in his description of evil men in i
Romans that "they knew God" (Romans 1:21,32). The evil
which issues from the flesh is the result of the perversion
of the will22 and not the ignorance of the mind:
Though they know God’s decree that those who do such
things deserve to die, they not only do them but ap
prove those who practice them (Romans 1:32).
Parsons states:
The words which Paul uses in connection with man’s sin
ning are all volitional in meaning. They can be trans- ;
lated ’a missing of the mark,’ ’a deviation from,’ ’a
falling away from,’23 - ^
The primary outworking of flesh in human conduct is
hostility to God (Romans 6:7). This hostility results from
"man’s unwillingness to recognize and acknowledge the weak- '
ness, finiteness, and dependence of his position . . .";
21 Note that it is an area in the total make-up and
not the total. Supra., p. 18.
22 George B. Stevens, The Pauline Theology, p. 157#
23 Ernest W. Parsons, The Religion of the New Testa
ment, p. 75.
Re inhold Niebuhr, The Nature and Destiny of Man,
I, 137. --------------------- --------
52
i
i.e., he does not recognize his creaturehood: ". . . for
although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give
thanks to him . * (Romans 1:21).
This hostility to God has its practical outworking in
a way of life which not only is opposed to God, but is op- ,
posed to the best interests of the individual himself and
to the best interests of society. One finds in Paul’s
catalogues of sin a division into sensual vices which harm
the individual and anti-social vices
They were filled with all manner of wickedness, evil,
covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife,
deceit, malignity, they are gossips, slanderers, haters '
of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, ;
disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless,
ruthless (Romans 1:29-31).
Mow the works of the flesh are plain: immorality, im
purity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmity,
strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, party
spirit, envy, drunkenness, carousing and the like
(Galatians §:19-21).
In the quotation from Galatians it should be noted that al- '
though the physical body is not in itself sinful, it can
become the "tool of sin";^^ i.e., the physical flesh can be
used by the "mind of the flesh" (Romans 8:7) to carry out
the letter’s rebellion against God and the maintainence of
25 G^ Dodd, The Epistle of Paul to the Romans,
p. 27.
Chester W. Quimby, Paul for Everyone, p. l65.
53 ,
i
a selfish orientation to life. Thus man’s sin has been |
shown to be "summed up in two words, I and No: No as it
thinks of God, f as it looks at life."27 go the flesh is .
1
that rebellious selfish area within the individual which ^
causes him to "fall short of the glory of God" (Romans
3:23).28 ;
i
Paul does not hesitate to announce God’s wrath upon
those who deviate from the divine glory under the influence
of the flesh: "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven
against all ungodliness and wickedness of men , . (Romans
l:l8). The term, wrath, is not a synonym for anger; it is
"not a certain feeling or attitude of God toward us, but
some process or effect in the realm of objective facts":
"Sin is the cause; disaster the effece."29 it is that
"inevitable process of cause and effect in a moral uni-
verse
Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for whatever a
man sows, that he will also reap. For he who sows to
his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption; but
27
Rail, o£. cit., p. 42.
pQ
C. H. Dodd believes that this reference (Romans
3:23) is Paul’s definition of sin— a failure to bear the
moral likeness of God in which man was originally created.
Dodd, op. cit., p. 50.
29 Ibid.. pp. 22, 23.
30 Ibid.. p. 23.
54
he who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap
eternal life (Galatians 6 :7,0 ),
This wrath will come upon all who "obey not the
gospel" (II Thessalonians 1:8). It means that such indi
viduals will suffer "the punishment of eternal destruction
and exclusion from the presence of the Lord ..."
I
(II Thessalonians 1:9). This punishment for evil, God’s
inevitable wrath, is seen to be eternal in its duration.
ill. SUMMARY A m COMPARISON
I
The Gita teaches that the two basic evils are ig- |
I
noranee and desire. Ignorance is not academic insufficiency
but a failure to perceive the true Self/Atman dwelling wlth-i
- I
I
in the individual; it is the root evil. It causes an in- ;
dividual to presume that he as ego/mind is the godhead, and |
thus to work with attachment.
Ignorance results from maya which is the delusion of I
identifying the apparent self with the true Self. This de- ;
lusion is further described as the result of the gunas which;
proceed from prakriti. These gunas move the individual to I
I
egotistic actions and blind him to Reality. Even the "best";
of the gunas (sattwa) must be overcome if Self-realization
is attained.
Closely allied to the obstacle of ignorance is that
of desire which is basically the ego’s coveting for
55
satisfaction in the senses. It includes the desire for
Heaven.
The practical outworking of ignorance and desire is
in conduct characterized by pride, arrogance, anxiety, in
justice, etc.
Punishment for evil is inevitable because of the
working of karma. The ignorant cannot get out of the cycle
of rebirth (samsara) since they are under the control of
prakriti. They must return to earthly embodiments and not
I
attain Brahman until they find freedom in the Self where
karma no longer operates.
Paul declares that flesh is the great obstacle to
self-realization. Flesh does not primarily refer to the
physical organism but to an area within the total personali
ty make-up which makes decisions out of harmony with the
will of God. Ignorance is not the cause of such wrong de
cisions, but a perversion of the will. Flesh causes the
individual to act as though he were God and to conduct his
life with an orientation in terms of his own ego, i.e.,
selfishly.
Lists of sins or vices are given in Romans and
Galatians* They include sensual sins as immorality and
drunkenness and anti-social sins as enmity, anger, and
murder.
56
The punishment for sin is inevitable and final. The ;
wrath of God means eternal exclusion from the presence of
Deity; it is not God’s passion of anger, but the inevitable
process of cause and effect in the moral universe.
Both the Gita and the epistles give similar catalogues
of sins. However, the source of evil differs in the two
contexts. The Gita believes that the source is ignorance
of the true Self, whereas the epistles teach that it is not
such ignorance but a perversion of the will. Maya is in
i
contrast to Paul’s term, flesh.
I The inevitability of punishment is taught in both the
Gita and the epistles. Both enç)hasize that punishment is
the natural result of the act. Although there may be some
connotations in the doctrine of karma which would not fit
into the Pauline concept of the wrath of God, and vice
versa, yet karma and the wrath of God are similar concepts. |
Karma results in rebirth (samsara); the wrath of God ex- |
eludes the Individual from the divine presence. The Gita
gives more hope for the evil ones; even though the true Self
is not realized, rebirth gives the individual another op
portunity for realization. Paul’s doctrine of punishment
is a final, eternal exclusion from God.
CHAPTER V
TECHNIQUES AND MEANS WHICH MAKE
SELF-REALIZATION POSSIBLE
I. TECHNIQUES AND MEANS AS TAUGHT IN THE GITA
I
Techniques and means refer to methods suggested in j
1
the Gita and in the epistles for overcoming the obstacles *
discussed in Chapter IV. Both of these works make central
I
in the overcoming process the doctrine of incarnation.
' (
The Gita stands in contrast to the Upanishads in ;
that it teaches the descent of Brahman into human form, i.e.J
the manifestation of Deity in Krishna. Such an Incarnate j
One is called an Avatar. Krishna is the full incarnation
of Brahman. Arjuna says of Krishna: ;
Thou art the Supreme Brahman, the Supreme Abode and the
Supreme Purifier, the Eternal, Divine Person, the First '
of the gods, the Unborn, the All-pervading (Gita X.12). |
i
Krishna’s divine attributes are set forth:
I . . . am the self (Atman) seated in the heart of all '
creation. I am the beginning, the middle and the very
end of beings (X.20). '
. . . I am Vishnu . . .(X.21). !
. . . I am the thunderbolt (X.26). !
Of the letters I am (the letter) A . . . I also am im
perishable time and I am the creator whose face is turned!
on all sides (X.33).
. . . nor is there anything, moving or unmoving that can;
exist without Me (X.39) * !
If the light of a thousand suns were to blaze forth all |
at once in the sky, that might resemble the splendour
of that exalted Being (XI.12). !
58
I
There is nothing whatever that is higher than I . . •
(VII.7).
The incarnation of Brahman is not limited to one historical ;
manifestation:
For the protection of the good, for the destruction of
the wicked and for the establishment of righteousness, |
I come into being from age to age (IV.8).
Actually the question of the historicity of Krishna is of
little consequence. What is of importance is "the eternal !
incarnation of the Divine, the everlasting bringing forth
of the perfect and divine life in the universe and in the
soul of man . ♦ . • However, Radhadkrishnan declares
there is "ample evidence" in favor of Krishna’s historicity.?
The primary purpose for the incarnation is to teach; .
"the avatar is the guru.Arjuna makes the request: "I am
Thy pupil; teach me . . ." (Gita II.7). The Avatar, Krish
na, by his teaching and example reveals to Arjuna how he can
raise himself and become what he potentially is.^
1
Krishna teaches that there is a three-fold pathway
to realization; karma-yoga, the way of works; jnana-yoga.
^ S. Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita, p. 28.
2 Loc. cit.
^ Sri Ramakrishna Centenary Memorial, The Cultural
Heritage of India, I, 129.
^ Radhakrishnan, op. cit., pp. l55j 157.
59 i
j
the way of knowledge; and bhakti-yoga, the way of faith or !
I
devotion. These various ways are provided for mankind since
men differ in temperaments and thus need different ap- '
proaches to the problem of self-realization: |
j
. . . the path of knowledge for men of contemplation I
and that of works for men of action (III.3). !
If you cannot become absorbed in me, then try to reach i
me by repeated concentration. If you lack the strength
to concentrate, then devote yourself to works which will
please me . . .If you cannot even do this, then sur
render yourself to me altogether.5
The Gita is not wholly consistent in its evaluation of the
I
different pathways. Each of the paths is preferred at some-
Itime or another. Any one of the three is acceptable, the
choice being left to the individual.^ Note the synthesis
I
of the various pathways in IX. 34:
On Me fix thy mind; to Me be devoted; worship Me; revere
Me; thus having disciplined thyself, with Me as thy
goal, to Me shalt thou come.
The pathway of works or action briiigs deliverance from
evil; ‘
I
What is action? What is inaction?— as to this even the !
wise are bewildered. I will declare to thee what action
is, knowing which thou shalt be delivered from evil
(IV.16).
He who in action sees inaction and action in action, he
is wise among men, he is yogin and he has accomplished
all his work (IV.18).
^ Swami Pravhavananda and Christopher Isherwood,
Bhagavad-gita, p. 130.
^ S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy. I, 575.
6o I
Note that the work which brings deliverance must be done
with the right motive, namely, that the work is done for the
Lord and the Lord is the Doer:
He whose undertakings are all free from the will of
desire . . . (IV.I9).
He who works for Me . . . he goes to Me . . . (XI.55). j
He who works, having given up attachment, resigning his j
actions to God, is not touched by sin, even as a lotus |
leaf (is untouched) by water (V.IO). i
Sin is no longer an obstacle and union is achieved: '
When one does not get attached to the objects of sense
or to works, and has renounced all purpose, then he is
I said to have attained to yoga (Vl.k, cf. XI.55).
Radhadkrishnan clarifies the nature of the Gita’s teaching
on work when he states: "The Gita bases its message of ac
tion on a philosophy of life* It requires us to know the i
meaning of life before we engage in actions."7 That phi
losophy is the belief that the Lord is the Doer.
The second pathway suggested in the Gita is that of
jnana-yoga. Ignorance is called the root evil; wisdom
(jnana), the "sovereign remedy. Jnana— wisdom or know
ledge--is not academic learning nor abstract knowledge. It
"cannot be attained by the logical methods of Western sci
ence, philosophy, and theology, or described in an deter
minate way"; it must be "immediately experienced to be
7 Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita, fn. p. 11.
® Ibid., p. 70.
6l
known. . . ."9 Compare IV.34: It is not men who have
learned the truth, but those who have "seen the truth" who
are the competent instructors.
Jnana rids the individual of sin:
Thinking of That, directing one’s whole conscious being
of That, making That their whole aim, with That as the
sole object of their devotion, they reach a state from
which there is no return, their sins washed away by
wisdom (V.17).
Even if thou shouldst be the most sinful of all sinners,
thou shalt cross over all evil by the beat of wisdom
alone (IV.38).
It ends rebirth and gives eternal life:
He who knows thus in its true nature My divine birth and
works, is not born again, when he leaves his body but
comes to Me, 0 Arjuna (IV.9).
I will describe that which is to be known and by knowing
which life eternal is gained. It is the Supreme Brahman
who is beginningleas and who is said to be neither ex
istent nor non-existent (XIII.12).
In the last reference it is seen that knowledge concerns the
Supreme Brahman who dwells in all beings. Brahman is the
"object and goal of all knowledge--He is seated in the
hearts of all" (XlII.17).
The pathway of jnana-yoga is one of self-elevation.
Wisdom does not come from without the individual, but is
discovered within him. It is the disciplined mind that
makes this discovery of the Self within the self and he is
9 p. S. C. Northrop, The Meeting of East and West,
p. 363.
: 62 ^
lifted to the Supreme Being: "Let a man lift himself by '
himself . • (VI.5). Such lifting requires constant dis- '
cipline (raja-yoga):
Let him gain little by little tranquility by means of |
reason controlled by steadiness and having fixed the
mind on the Self, let him not think of anything (else)
(VI.25).
He who meditates on the Supreme Person with his thought
attuned by constant practice and not wandering after
anything else, he, 0 Partha (Arjuna), reaches the Per
son, Supreme and Divine (VIII.8).
Although it is the knowledge of the Self via direct
experience that is enphasized in the Gita; knowledge of
written truth is not condemned absolutely. However, the
ones who rejoice in the "letter of the Vedas" are said to
return to the earth (See II.lj.2 and IV.20,21). Thus such
I
knowledge is of an inferior type. The Gita would, in fact,
follow the Upanishads which declare:
Two kinds of knowledge must be known . . .
They are the Higher Knowledge and the lower knowledge.
Of these two, the lower knowledge is the Rig Veda . . . i
rituals . . . and the Higher Knowledge is that by which '
the Imperishable Brahman is attained (Mundaka Up. 1.1.
4.5).10
Such lower knowledge of text should lead to the Higher Know
ledge as, for example, the proclamation of Krishna:
Listen again to My supreme word, the most secret of all.
Well beloved art thou of Me, therefore I shall tell thee
what is good for thee (XVIII.64)*
Swami Nikhilananda, The Upanishads, I, 262, 263.
63 ;
When the Higher Knowledge is attained, lower knowledge of '
all types becomes unnecessary.
As the Gita minimizes knowledge of text so it mini- ;
mizes rituals ; !
The form of worship which consist in contemplating |
Brahman is superior to ritualistic worship with material
offerings. 1
But acts of sacrifice, almsgiving, and austerity should
not be given up . . . are a means of purification to |
those who rightly understand them.Ü
The third pathway is that of bhakti-yoga or faith.
It is this pathway which is the Gita’s distinctive contri
bution to Hindu thought. The pathway of jnana-yoga in the
Gita follows the teaching of the Upanishads; it is a path
way opened for the most part, to the spiritual elite and
I
difficult for the average man to follow. But the pathway
of work plus that of faith makes it possible for the average
I
man to fulfill the duties of his position in life, and in |
the midst of his vocation find deliverance from samsara and i
the gift of eternal life.
The way of jnana-yoga is one of striving to attain
deliverance; the way of bhakti is one of receiving deliver
ance. From the viewpoint of Deity this receiving is de
scribed by the term, grace;
Pravhavananda and Isherwood, pp. cit., pp. 6?,
l6o.
64:
I
Fixing thy thought on Me, thou shalt by My grace, cross
over all difficulties • . ♦ (XVIII.58).
By His grace shalt thou obtain supreme peace and eternal
abode (XVIII.62).
This concept of grace is not defined in the Gita. Does it >
come from without the individual or from within him? M* i
Desai holds that position that grace is from within man, ‘
rather than coming down from Deity outside h i m , ^2
Faith is the receiving of grace as seen from the
viewpoint of the individual. Faith (devotion) must be
i
centered on Krishna: , , to me be devoted • . ." ( IX.34).
It is described as the aspiration of the soul for wisdom,
hot blind belief:
He who has faith, who is absorbed in it (i.e., wisdom)
and who has subdued his senses gains wisdom and having
gained wisdom he attains quickly the supreme peace
(IV.39).
It is the attitude of insufficiency as Inferred in the term,
refuge: ". . . taking refuge in Me ..." (IV.10). Bhakti
enables the individual to go beyond maya and attain réalisa-
' I
tion in Brahman:
This divine maya of Mine, consisting of the modes is
hard to overcome. But those who take refuge in Me alone|
cross beyond it (VII.l4).
But by unswerving devotion to Me, 0 Arjuna, I can be
thus known, truly seen and entered into . . . (XI.54)*
^2 M. Desai, The Gospel of Selfless Action or the
Gita According to Gandhi, pp. lOF, I09.
13 Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita. p. 1?1.
65
This is the Supreme Person • . . (who) can . . . be
gained by unswerving devotion (VIII.22).
Actually faith as taught in the Gita means that the
grace of God is earned to a certain extent. In other words,
man must contribute something to his salvation; the Gita is
Pelagian rather than Augustinian.Note in VII.29 the
reference to both receiving (refuge) and striving;
These who take refuge in Me and strive for deliverance
from old age and death, they know the Brahman (or Abso
lute) entire (they know) the Self and all about action.
The way of deliverance and Self-realization is open
to all men and women; God does not discriminate against any
one, not even those of lower castes
I am alike to all beings. None is hateful nor dear to
Me. But those who worship Me with devotion they are in
Me and I also in them (IX.29).
For those who take refuge in Me . . . though they are
lowly born, women, Vaisyas, as well as Sudras, they also
attain to the highest goal (IX.32).
The way of knowledge may not be possible to take by all, but
all can at least start by the way of bhakti. A. W. Ryder
comments :
A most remarkable feature of the Song is its generosity,
its recognition of the irreducible diversity of human
nature. Other religions excommunicate those incapable
111.
^4 Ibid., pp. 62, 63.
^5 Pravhavananda and Isherwood, o£. cit., pp. 110,
66
of following a certain narrow path.^^ " :
The Gita makes a unique attempt to synthesize the
ways of action, knowledge, and faith. But it is the latter
which is the innovation, the Gita’s Supreme Word:
But those who with faith, holding Me as their supreme
aim', follow this immortal wisdom, those devotees are
exceedingly dear to Me (XII.20).
Fix thy mind on Me; be devoted to Me; sacrifice to Me;
prostrate thyself before Me; so shalt thou come to Me.
X promise thee truly, for thou art dear to Me. Abandon
ing all duties, come to Me alone for shelter. Be not
grieved, for I shall release thee from all evils
(XVIII.65,66).
II. TECHNIQUES AND MEANS AS TAUGHT
!
IN THE PAULINE EPISTLES
The Pauline epistles like the Gita make the incarna
tion of Deity central to their teaching on the means of
deliverance from evil. Jesus Christ is declared to be such
an incarnation, the Son sent by God: "But when the time had
fully come, God sent forth his Son ..." (Galatians 4:4) •
This Son is the fulness of God: "For in him dwells the whole
fulness of deity bodily . . ." (Colossians 2:9). The resur
rection of Jesus is proof for Paul of this incarnation:
". ♦ . designated Son of God . . . by his resurrection from
the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord" (Romans 1:3,4). The
Arthur W. Ryder, The Bhagavad-Gita, p. xv.
67
divine attributes of Jesus are described in Colossians:
He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of
all creation; for in him all things are created, in
heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether
thrones or dominions or principalities or authorities—
all things were created through him and for him. He is
before all things, and in him all things hold together.
He is the head of the body, the church; he is the be
ginning, the first-born from the dead, that in every
thing he might be pre-eminent. For in him all the full
ness of God was pleased to dwell (Colossians 1:15-19)•
The primary purpose of the incarnation of God in
Jesus was not to teach, but to redeem; this incarnation
occurred but one time:
. . . God sent forth his Son . . . to redeem (Galatians
k:4).
. . . God was in Christ reconciling the world to him
self . . . (II Corinthians 5:19)-
. . . and through him to reconcile to himself all things,
whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood
of his cross (Colossians 1:20).
W. Morgan' epitomizes the Pauline doctrine of the in- ,
carnation thus: "The incarnation is not itself the redeeming
fact; it is but the pathway to the cross."^7 it is the '
i 1
cross plus the resurrection which constitutes "the very
foundation pillars" upon which the whole structure of Paul’s
thought was built.In the two events of the crucifixion
and the resurrection Paul sees the fulness of the divine
17 W. Morgan, The Religion and Theology of Paul,
p. 67.
Elias Andrews, The Meaning of Christ for Paul,
p. 88. ---------- ----------------- ---
68 I
j
activity seeking to deliver man from his evil and bringing
I
i him into eternal salvation. The term, righteousness, is |
used by the Apostle to designate such activity:^9
I For I am not ashamed of the gospel: it is the power of I
God for salvation to everyone who has faith, to the Jew ;
I first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteous- |
i ness of God is revealed through faith for faith . . . ;
I (Romans l:l6, 17). |
This righteousness, which is God’s part in man’s salvation, i
I
is also called grace; the latter is the activity of God, or
more accurately, the love of God "in relation to sinful
m e n " : 20 ’ ’But God shows his love for us in that while we were
I
yet sinners Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8). Such activi-
ity, such grace, is entirely beyond the efforts or the achieve*
i '
ment of man; it is entirely a divine gift: ". . . they are
justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption
which is in Christ Jesus ..." (Romans 3:24). The heart |
of Paul’s religion is that God must take the initiative j
since man is helpless to save h i m s e l f .21
The grace of God is made manifest in the death of
Jesus on the cross. Just how the cross accomplishes the
^9 c. H. Dodd, The Epistle of Paul to the Romans,
p. 10.
PCi
Harris P. Rail, According to Paul, p. 57.
21 man can save himself: this was Paul’s great
discovery." James S. Stewart, A Man in Christ, p. 85.
69
redemption of the individual is not answered by the Apos
t l e . 22 that it does is declared with all assurance:
I I
the cross justifies (Romans 3:24); it saves from the wrath
! of God (Romans 5:9)J it brings reconciliation (cf. Romans |
'5:10: ”... we were reconciled to God by the death of his |
I Son ...” cf. Colossians 1:20). i
■ There are many terms used to describe the results of !
i
the death of Jesus in the life of the individual. Besides
justification and reconciliation Paul uses forgiveness, re- I
demption, and expiation. However, these are all terms which!
describe the same result from a different viewpoint.23 They
all indicate that the "energy” of God’s love24 has reached
i . !
; the individual through the cross. The barrier of sin is
removed, forgiveness granted, and the way opened into a new
1 :
life. The latter phrase must be considered carefully. The
'
cross makes possible a new relationship with God, but that j
does not mean that realization is attained; it is only p6-
.tential. Parsons states: "Transactionally Paul stands as
I
I
justified; actually he has a lifelong moral conflict on his ;
22 E. W. Parsons, The Religion of the New Testament,
p. 80. ^ ^
23
Adolph Deissmann, The Religion of Jesus and the
Faith of Paul, p. 208.
! 24 George B. Stevens, The Pauline Theology, p. 98.
70 ;
h a n d s ."25 However, even this conflict to attain perfection I
is not to be removed from the area of grace to that of
human attainment; it is the divine activity at work:
i
I . . . work out your own salvation with fear and trem*?
bling; for God is at work in you, both to will and to i
work for his good pleasure (Philippians 2:12,13)• ■
I
I The doctrine of grace is one half of Paul’s doctrine ,
of redemption; the other half can be summed up by the term, |
(
faith. Grace is God’s part in initiating and completing the
work of salvation; faith is man’s part in appropriating
lit.26 Faith is intellectual in that it is belief in a writ-
I ten word: "So faith comes by what is heard, and what is
heard come by the preaching of Christ" (Romans 10:17). But
it is more than intellectual; it is also volitional:
It is our own wholehearted surrender of ourselves to
God’s goodness. It is our self admission of our moral |
helplessness and our inability to live as well as we
ought. It is our complete relying on God’s sufficiency '
to cleanse and recreate us in the image and character |
of Jesus Christ himself. This then is faith— both be- |
lieving and accepting the forgiveness and re-creation |
God offers us through Jesus.27
Furthermore, faith is more than intellectual and ;
volitional; it is also mystical (cf. Galatians 2:20). It is
this mystical aspect of faith which so strikingly
25 Parsons, op. cit., p. 97.
26 Stevens, p^. cit., pp. 261, 262.
27 Chester W. Quimby, The Great Redemption, p. 10.
71 I
distinguishes Paul from Jesus* The latter conceived of |
faith as a simple trust in the heavenly Father; there was j
no hint of mysticism*^® For Paul faith is the mystical |
state in which the Christian lives; it is "the channel i
through which Christ abodes in the hearts of Christians |
♦ * *"^9 "Faith" and "in Christ" are synonymous in the !
i
teaching of the Apostle* I
Faith makes acquital and reconciliation with God
possible: "* * * we are justified by faith * • *" (Romans |
5:1). By it the individual appropriates the divine activi- '
ity, i*e., the righteousness of God (cf* Romans 1:16,17),
I - I
iFaith grants the individual the status of sonship: "* * *
for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith" |
I
(Galatians 3:26)* Sonship is the all-inclusive term which
: describes the results of faith: a new status with God i
t
through justification, union with the living Christ which is;
I
both mystical and ethical, and a promised inheritance i
("* . * if children, then heirs, heirs of God and fellow-
heirs with Christ * * *" (Romans 8:17)),
There are some references in the Pauline epistles to '
knowledge as something more than the mere intellectual
William H* P* Hatch, The Pauline Idea of Faith,
p* 82*
^9 Ibid*, p.
: 72
acceptance of truth. Compare PhilippIans 3:10: , . that
II may know him and the power of his resurrection . . ."
This knowledge of Christ is analogous to the familiar Paul- '
ine phrase, "in Christ,It is not the antithesis of
faith, but actually is that faith which makes possible Christ
living in the individual,Thus it is e^qperiential and noti
academic.
The actual point in the individual’s experience when
grace/faith becomes effective is in the act of baptism:
Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized
into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were
buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that
as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the
Father, we too might walk in newness of life. For if we
have been united with him in a death like his, we shall
certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his.
We know that our old self was crucified with him so that
the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no
longer be enslaved to sin . . . The death he died he
died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he
lives to God. So you also must consider yourselves dead
to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus (Romans 6:3-6,
10, 11) »
In baptism the death of Christ is shared and the believer
becomes identified with C h r i s t .32 xn baptism the crucifixion
of Christ becomes appropriated by the individual as the
30 j. Hugh Michael, The Bpistle of Paul to the
Philippians, p. li|.6.
31 John Knox, Chapters in a life of Paul, p. 132.
32 George S. Duncan, The Epistle of Paul to the
Galatians, pp. 71, 123*
. ■ “ 73
crucifixion of the old man, i.e., the flesh (sarx). Edman
I points out the tremendous significance Paul attached to
I
baptism: "Baptism was in Paul neither a rite of purification
; nor a mere symbol. It was a realistic incarnation of Christ’ s
1 death and rising to immortality,"33 Baptism thus effects
I
! the crucifixion of the flesh and on the positive side i
brings the individual into Christ* "For as many of you as
were baptized into Christ have put on Christ" (Galatians
3:27).3^
I
I The means of deliverance are open to all; ". . .to
the Jew first and also to the Greek" (Romans l:l6)j God
shows no partiality (cf. Romans 2:11). But there is only
one way set forth by the Apostle for all types of people.
All are condemned who do not believe the truth as proclaimed
by him (cf. II Thessalonians 2:12).
III. SUMMARY AND COMPARISON
Both the Gita and the epistles make central the idea ,
33 Irwin Edman, The Mind of Paul, p. 135*
3 i $ . The Pauline concept of baptism has been the sub
ject of much research. However, there is no unanimity of
opinion in regard to the question of whether or not the
Apostle considered baptism a sacrament. See Albert Schweit-
zer. The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle, pp. I8f, 22?ff,
2Ô2f, 296; Parsons, op.cît., pp. 99^101; and S. Angus, The
Religious Quests of the Graeco-Roman World, pp. 200, 202,
205. ■
: ' " ' 7k
of the incarnation of Deity. In the first instance it is
Krishna who reveals God and in the second one it is Christ.
However, the Gita teaches recurring incarnations whereas the
epistles declare that there has been only one incarnation
and there will be no other. The purpose of the incarnation
of Krishna is to enable him to become man’s teacher; the
purpose of the incarnation of Christ is that he might be
man’s redeemer.
Krishna teaches that there is a three-fold pathway
available for one desiring to overcome evil and attain Self-
realization. Such a variety of ways is to accomodate the
diversity in human ten^e rament s. The pathway of works can
I
deliver from evil when the individual performs his work with}
no desire for the fruits thereof and believes that Brahman
is the Doer. The pathway of knowledge also enables the in- :
dividual to throw off the weight of sin. Such knowledge is ;
i
not academic, but an immediate experience of the Supreme i
Being; it is the discovery of the Self/Atman within the in- ;
dividual self. Bhakti or the pathway of faith is the Gita’s:
unique emphasis. Many individuals find the way of jnana or }
knowledge difficult or impossible, but all men and women in ,
all stations of life can begin with the way of faith. Faith
i
is the individual’s receiving of the grace of God. It is
i
the feeling of insufficiency as suggested by the term.
75 j
refuge, with the resultant surrender of the individual to
the Self within. In contrast to bhakti which is a way of '
receiving, the way of knowledge is one of striving to attain
I
deliverance; it is a way of self-elevation. |
The Pauline epistles present only one way of salva- :
I
tion; there is no accommodation to diversity of tempera- j
i
ments. This one way bears resemblances to the pathway of I
I
bhakti. Grace and faith are the key words. Grace is the
activity of divine love on behalf of men. It is entirely
undeserved and is impossible to attain by striving. It in
!
!no sense can be ascribed to an activity within man, as in ;
I ;
I the case of the Gita, but comes wholly from without; the
' I
initiative is always that of the transcendent God. Grace is;
supremely manifested in the death of Jesus. How the cross
; accomplishes the redemption of the individual through this |
grace of God is nowhere explained by the Apostle, but that j
it does is assumed. God’s grace or "energy of love" reaches]
the individual only via the cross; the barrier of evil is |
I
removed by the cross and the individual stands justified be-|
fore God. It is this aspect of Pauline thought, which !
posits the necessity of grace from without the individual,
and which demands a cross, that is in most striking contrast'
with the teaching of the Gita.
i
As grace is God’s part in redemption so faith is !
76
man’s part. Faith is the method of receiving the grace of
God. It is intellectual in that understanding and belief
in a text is necessary (Note that the Gita makes text know
ledge, inferior knowledge). However, faith is more than
intellectual; it is volitional since the attitude of sur-
,render because of human insufficiency is required. This
aspect of faith is described in the Gita by the term,
I refuge. Finally, faith is mystical. It is the channel
through which the living Christ comes to abide within the
I individual; "faith" and "in Christ" are synonymous. Such
i faith-mystic ism is not taught in the Gita since in the lat- ;
ter the individual by faith discovers God within. In
Paul’s teaching Christ comes from above and through the
Spirit takes up residence in the individual. This state is
one of spiritual union, but as it was pointed out in Chapter
Two,35 it is basically ethical.
Grace plus faith enables one to be adopted as a son j
of God with a promised inheritance. Actually, however, the '
appropriation of grace through faith is accomplished in the i
act of baptism in which the flesh is crucified and Christ '
comes to abide within the individual. The Gita makes no
such place for an outward ritual.
I
I
■- - - - - - 3 - - - - - - i
Bupra., p. 21.
77 .
In a few places Paul seems to approach the Gita’s
iconcept of knowledge as immediate experience. "To know '
'Christ" equals "faith," equals being "in Christ." However,
'this knowledge does not discover the Divine One within, j
but after receiving Christ/Spirit from above, it is the act i
I
I of recognizing the presence of the abiding Guest.
I
I Paul’s one way of salvation is open to all types of
Ipeople, just as the pathway of bhakti is open to all. But
I condemnation is pronounced upon those who reject this one
I way. The Gita is more tolerant.
CHAPTER VI
ETHICAL RESULTS OP SELF-REALIZATION
I. THE ETHICAL CONFLICT OF 4RJUNA AND PAUL
: The Gita and the Pauline epistles both set forth an
ethical struggle in the life of the protagonist in each
Iwriting; the conflict is in the realm of duty. For Arjuna
the problem was to discover what his duty was so that he
jcould follow it;^ for Paul the problem was to discover the
ability to perform duty already known.
Arjuna faced the dilemma of warfare which would in
volve killing his own kinsmen. Rather than do this deed he
declared to Krishna:
I shall not struggle,
I Shall not strike them.
Now let them kill me.
That will be better.2
But was abstaining from action and withdrawing from the
world the solution? Thus Ar juna petitioned Krishna:
^ It should be noted again that some interpreters be
lieve that the battlefield of conflict is within the indi- |
vidual and of his own making. The individual is continually
warring against evil forces in order to gain the "Kingdom of
.the Self." S. Prabhavananda, Vedic Religion and Philosophy,
p. 117. ;
! P
S. Prabha vananda and Christopher Isherwood, |
Bhagavad-Gita, p. 37. !
! 79 ,
I cannot see where my duty lies.
Krishna, I beg of you, tell me frankly
I and clearly what I ought to do.3
' Since Arjuna was of the warrior class (kshatriya), it
!was his duty or dharma to carry out the necessities of the
; battle. Dharma is used in the Gita primarily "in the sense
I ' I
Iof an unalterable customary order of class-duties or caste- |
•duties and the general approved course of conduct for the !
people. . . ."4 It is the specific law of one’s life and
one’s being or nature.^ Such a law cannot be violated with
out disaster;
' But if you refuse to fight this righteous war, you will
be turning aside from your duty. You will be a sinner
and disgraced.6
One’s dharma is to be followed no matter how imperfectly !
done: "It is better to do your own duty, however, imperfect
ly, than to assume the duties of another person successful
ly. The secret of doing one’s duty is to do it with no
desire for reward:
486.
3 Ibid.. p. 39-
^ S. Daggupta, A History of Indian Philosophy, II,
A. Roy, editor. The Message of the Gita, p. 25.
^ Prabhavananda and Isherwood, op. cit., p. 43.
7 Ibid., p. 58.
80
Stop hoping for worldly rewards. Fix your mind on the !
Atman.
j Be free from the sense of ego. Dedicate all your action
I to me. Then go forward and fight.8
In the fulfillment of one’s own dharma, whatever it '
may he, one finds the end of inner conflict and the way
opened for liberation and realization.9 This is the message
i
of the Gita to Arjuna and to all mankind. ,
; The Apostle’s ethical problem as described in the
seventh chapter of Romans was the search for power which
Iwould enable him to do his known duty. There is not space
in this thesis to argue the point of whether or not chapter
(
seven is autobiographical. C. H. Dodd states the positive
case in his commentary. He believes that the section refers
to the beginning of the Apostle’s own Christian career.
In the Torah Paul had read the commandment, "You
shall not covet." But he found that in spite of this pro
hibition another law of his mind wrought in him "all kinds
of covetousness" (Homans 7:7,8»23). There was nothing to '
criticize in the ideal of the law:^^ ". . . the law is holy.
® Ibid., p. 57.
9 Swami Nikhilananda, The Bhagavad Gita, p. 70.
C, H. Dodd, The Epistle of Paul to the Romans,
p. 107.
E. W. Parsons, The Religion of the Hew Testament,
p. 104. -------- ---------------------------
81
and the commandment Is holy and just and good" (Romans 7:12).
But how was he to keep it? "Wretched man that I ami Who
will deliver me from this body of death?" (Romans 7:24)
Oonald W, Riddle writes of the Apostle’s dilemma: |
The crisis in his life came because his developing in
dividuality led him to make even more determined efforts ;
to attain the standard of Torah.12 ;
This crisis reached its culmination on the road to Damascus.
His years of unsuccessful struggle to keep the law precipi^
tated a conversion experience so that he could resolve his
wretchedness "through Jesus Christ our Lord" (Romans 7:25).
After his conversion he possessed the ethical dynamic de
scribed in Galatians 2:20: ". . . Christ . . . lives in
me . . . "
II. ETHICAL RESULTS DESCRIBED IN THE GITA
Against the background of these ethical conflicts,
consideration will now be made of the ethical teaching of
the Gita and the epistles.
The Gita teaches that ethical conduct is not the re
sult of external compulsion, but it is the natural by
product of yoga, union with God. Note V.24: the light which
directs the individual must come from within. It is the
1^ Donald W. Riddle, Paul: Man of Conflict, p. 50.
82 :
knowledge of the real Self within man which leads to |
"moral virtues" (XIII.11).13
' I
In achieving yoga the individual rises above the
1
moral distinctions of good and evil: "One who has yoked his
intelligence (with the Divine). . . casts away even here |
both good and evil" (II.50). Parquhar has interpreted the ■
latter teaching to mean that an individual who attains yoga '
is not necessarily moral— even if such a one "be guilty of
vicious actions, his actions do not stain him. "l4 However,
this interpretation is not consistent with the total teach
ing of the Gita; the individual is morally responsible.
Aurobindo points out:
f
Man is not like a tiger or the fire or the storm; he
cannot kill and say as a sufficient justification, "I
am acting according to my nature," and he cannot do it
because he has not the nature and not, therefore the
law of action . . . of the tiger, storm or fire. He hasr
a conscious intelligent will, a buddhi, and to that he i
must refer his actions. If he does not do so, if he j
acts blindly according to his impulses and passions, '
then the law of his being is not rightly worked. . . .^5,
!
Thus the act is important but more in^ortant that the ex
ternal effect of the action is the inner motive of the
action; the latter is rooted in the nature of the
T3 S. Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita. p. 305.
J. N. Parquhar, The Crown of Hinduism, p. 230.
Roy, 0£. cit., p. 62.
83
individual•
Morality must, therefore, not be the goal but union
with Brahman. Yoga takes precedence over moral conduct, or,
to put it in Western terms, metaphysics is pre-requisite to '
i
ethics else the latter comes to lack dynamic and permanence.:
I
M. Hiriyana’s viewpoint is open to question when he states i
I
that the metaphysical questions in the Gita form merely the
background for the ethical teaching which is of first im
portance. ^7 Actually the metaphysical questions on the
Imeaning of life make-up Krishna’s major instruction to
iArjuna. The latter cannot ultimately know his duty until
he knows the Self. He must finally rise above all duties
( dharmas) since they are of the phenomenal world and find
refuge In Brahman before he is released from evil action.
Only then can he truly serve God:
Abandoning all duties, come to Me alone for shelter. Be
not grieved, for I shall release thee from all evils . .
There is none among men who does dearer service to Me
than he; nor shall there be another dearer to Me in the
world (XVIII.66,69).
True service for God does not demand the withdrawal
from ordinary living and becoming a professional ascetic.
The Gita makes available the way of Self-realization for
Dasgupta, o£. cit., II, 507. ,
^7 M. Hiriyana, Outlines of Indian Philosophy, p. 117J
8 1 4 . .
those who maintain their households and "take part in the
I business of the w o r l d . "^8 Yoga and the resultant by-
I
'products of moral living and right action do not divorce
lone from life, nor does the yogin miss anything of the ful- :
: ness of life.^9
I :
i Extreme forms of austerity and bodily torture are :
condemned: ;
■ Those men, vain and conceited and impelled by the force
of lust and passions, who perform violent austerities,
which are not ordained by the scriptures, being foolish
i oppress the group of elements in their body and Me also
I dwelling in the body. Know these to be demoniac in
their resolves (XVII.5,6).
i
The Gita pleads for a wise direction of man’s nature and I
hot the suppression of it. Moderation--the golden mean— is ,
i
recommended in all aspects of living:
Verily, yoga is not for him who eats too much nor ab- .
stains too much from eating. It is not for him, 0 |
Arjuna, who sleeps too much or keeps awake too much*
For the man who is temperate in food and recreation,
who is restrained in his actions, whose sleep and waking
are regulated, there ensues discipline (yoga; which j
destroys all sorrow (VI.16,17). ;
Perhaps the best summary of ethical practice is found'
in IX.27: "Whatever thou doest . . . do that . . . as an ;
^ t
offering to Me"; and in the golden rule of VI.32: "He . . . j
j. N. Parquhar, to Outline of the Religious
Literature of India, p. 88.
T9 Roy, op. cit., p. 136.
85 :
who sees with equality everything, in the image of his own *
self, whether in pleasure or in pain, he is considered a
perfect yogi." Such a life has its demonstration in charac
ter traits as unselfishness (VI.2), self-control, patience
(X.4)» friendliness to all, compassion, freedom from egoism :
I
{XII. 13), humility, integrity, purity, steadfastness (XIII.7),
contentment (XII. 19)» forgiveness, and freedom from malice
(XVI.3). All of these traits are "the endowments of him who
is born with the divine nature" (XVI.3).
The ethical by-products of the one who has realized
his true Self have social ramifications.^^ The yogin cannot;
be indifferent to the needs of the world. He rejoices in
doing good to all creatures (V.25); he is concerned for
their welfare (XII.4)* He sees the Self in all men (VI.29),
and is free from enmity to men (XI*55). Thus he treats all
I I
men fairly (VI.9). His greatest work is to "set people on j
the right path" (III.2 5 ) i.e., he wants to "help others |
I '
find their true nature, and to attain true happiness.
Since this thesis is not concerned primarily with
the sociological aspects of the Gita’s teaching, there has
been no discussion of caste. The Gita teaches the duties of
caste (See XVIII.42-48), yet the Gita*s teaching refers to
the caste system in its ideal purity rather than to the con
cepts of the modern era. See Roy, op. cit., p. 237 for fur
ther discussion.
Nikhilananda, pp. cit., p. Il4*
pp
Radhakri shnan, pp. cit., - p. 184.
86
I
I
Radhadkrishnan gives an excellent summary of the
ethical viewpoint of the Gita:
The two sides of religion, the personal and the social, ‘
are eii^hasized in the Gita. Personally, we should dis
cover the Divine in us and let it penetrate the human; |
socially, society must be subdued to the image of the
Divine. The individual should grow in his freedom and
I uniqueness and he should recognize the dignity of every ;
: man, even the most insignificant. Man has not only to
ascend to the world of spirit but also to descend to
the world of creatures*23
III. ETHICAL RESULTS DESCRIBED IN THE PAULINE EPISTLES
I
I
! The conversion of the Apostle Paul was the end result
Iof a tremendous ethical conflict. This conflict and its
resolution are basic to the understanding of Paul’s thought;
it was the conversion experience that accounts for the di
rection of his theological interest: How was the barrier of
evil in man to be removed so that the Spirit could dwell
within him in order that he might be empowered for ethical
I
conduct? Much of the Pauline conception of the plan of re- ;
demption is geared to make the latter possible. |
As it has been shown, Paul knew what his ethical duty;
was; his problem was to discover enabling power: "I can will|
I
what is right, but I cannot do it" (Romans 7:18). Thus his
search was for an ethical dynamic. This dynamic he "ascribes
23 ^
Loc. cit.
87 :
I
to residence within him of the Spirit of God, the Holy
Spirit, the Spirit of Christ, or Christ (#10 is in spiritual |
form). He makes no clear differentiation among them.i
I
This moral dynamic stands in sharp contrast to the attempt I
at external moral compulsion represented by Torah: "... |
I
a new covenant, not in a written code but in the Spirit; forj
the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life" '
(II Corinthieins 3:6).
Conversion produces inner results. It transforms the
mind so that it is no longer a "base mind" (cf. Romans 12:2
with Romans 1:28). It crucifies the flesh (sarx) so that
the power of the indwelling Spirit/Christ is made available
for ethical motivation.Note Galatians 5:22; the charac
ter traits listed are the spontaneous reaction of the in
dividual who is under the control of the Spirit of God— the
natural by-products of this Spirit. Here is the source of ^
Paul’s originality. He does not list any new character ;
traits; he does proclaim a new motivating power, a new
ethical energy.
2I 4. parsons, o£. cit., p. 97.
The Holy Spirit in Pauline thought is not conceiv
ed as a mechanical or magical power such as dominated the I
thought of the primitive church (cf. Acts of the Apostles), I
but it is conceived in terms of ethical power. It is the j
Holy Spirit. Harris F. Rail, According to Paul, pp. 138,139*
- j
! ___ Mary B. - Andrews,-The-Ethical-Teaching of Paul, p 3b.
88
I The character traits of the Christian life are listed
throughout the Apostle’s writings. Perhaps Galatians 5:22,
23 summarizes them all: "But the fruit of the Spirit is
love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
gentleness, self control. ..." In Colossians 3:12 com
passion is added. The twelfth chapter of Romans sets down 1
I
many of the same traits, but also stresses absence of re
venge in the heart of the convert (cf. Romans 12:?f). All
of these traits are in reality manifestations of love. Note
!
the primary place of love in the Galatian reference and
especially in the thirteenth chapter of I Corinthians. A
life of love results from the presence of the Spirit/Christ:
I
... God’s love has been poured into our hearts through;
the Holy Spirit which has been given to us (Romans 5:15)#
. . . the love of Christ controls us . . . (II Corinth
ians 5:14 ) *
The Spirit "reproduces in the believer the character
of Christ"^7 such as is described under the phrase, "fruit
of the Spirit." Thus Paul’s ethical teaching does not point
to a mere imitation of the life of the historical Jesus, but
to a mystical union with the heavenly Christ, a union which ,
is primarily "for the production of ethical results."^8
Paul and his fellow-bellevers no longer fail to attain the
^7 Chester W. Quimby, Paul for Everyone, p. 175.
P Ernest DeWitt Burton, Spirit, Soul, and Flesh,
p.—IQO. . . — .— . _— - . . - " '
89 I
ethical life, they are "impelled" into it by virtue of this ^
union.^9 Furthermore, all conduct is to be evaluated in |
terms of this union (cf. Colossians 3:2,3,17). I
* i
; The ethics of the Pauline experience-theology have '
I
'social ramifications. Klausner states that Paul is far |
I from being a saint because actual saints live in monasteries^
; and do not organize and administer congregations.30 But |
I
'Paul clearly indicates that his ethical mysticism does not
demand withdrawal from the world, but it does require that '
I one takes his place in it.31 Service for other men is the
I Christian’s great duty since such service is the manifesta- j
'tion of l o v e :32 , through love be servants of one an-
I I
other" (Galatians 5:13). This service includes contributing!
"to the needs of the saints" (Romans 12:13), bearing the
’ . I
jburdens of others (Galatians 6:2), and refraining from harsh
judgments upon ethically neutral practices (Romans 1^:Iff). |
The Apostle’s social ethics included directions to i
avoid making of distinctions because of sex, nationality, |
^9 Morton S. Enslin, The Ethics of Paul, p. 64* |
Joseph Klausner, From Jesus to Paul, pp. 431, 432. |
31 Albert Schweitzer, The Mysticism of Paul the
Apostle, p. 388. j
I
32 Enslin, 0£. cit., p. 75* I
90 ;
or economic status: |
Here there cannot be Greek and Jew, circumcised and ;
uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free man,
but Christ is all, and in all (Colossians 3:11).
I
Family ties are to be rooted in the Lord (Colossians 3:18*21).
: Relationships between slave and master are to be based upon j
I the concept of service to the Lord in the first case and !
the acknowledgment of sovereignty to the Master in heaven in'
'the second case (Colossians 3:22 to 4^15 Philemon). In
fact, now by the Spirit/Christ there was to be adequate
dynamic to keep that commandment first laid down in the Old !
ITestament (Leviticus 19:18) and re-emphasized by Jesus
; !
(Matthew 22:39) and declared by the Apostle to be the ful- |
fillment of the law: "You shall love your neighbor as your- j
self" (Galatians 5:l4). ;
It is the life of love with its personal and social |
aspects which has resulted from the activity of the Incar- '
nate Redeemer through the Spirit within the individual that i
is for the Apostle Paul the highest fulfillment of the self;,
"If any one is in Christ, he is a new creation, the old has j
I
passed away, behold, the new has oorne” (II Corinthians
5:17). '
91
IV. SUMMARY AND COMPARISON
The ethical teaching of both the Gita and the Pauline
epistles is set against a background of ethical conflict.
For Arjuna the problem was to discover the nature of duty;
Ifor Paul it was to discover a power which would enable him
ito carry out duty already known.
The Gita teaches that ethical conduct is the natural
by-product of yoga and not the result of external laws. In |
i
this state of yoga, union with God, moral distinctions in a
sense cease to exist. Such a concept, however, does not '
mean there is moral irresponsibility. It is related, insteaà
I
ito the clearly delineated doctrine that moral conduct is not I
! I
the ultimate goal of life, but yoga. Unless yoga is basic
to ethics, the latter will lack dynamic and thus permanence.
Arjuna desired to know and do his duty, but he could not
1
know his duty until he discovered his true Self. When the |
I
latter is discovered, one no longer needs ethical instrue- '
tion. '
The state of yoga does not require one to withdraw |
from ordinary life and accept an ascetic status. Moderation
is recommended in all aspects of living. All conduct is to
t I
be viewed as an offering to Brahman and is to be carried outj
I
in terms of one’s union with all men. Character traits suchj
as unselfishness, self-control, patience, compassion, etc.
92
are descriptive of the true yogin.
Yoga has not only natural by-products in individual
conduct but also in social concern. The yogin rejoices in
doing good to all creatures; he is concerned for this wel- '
!
fare, especially that they find their true Self.
The Pauline epistles like the Gita teach that ethical
conduct must issue from an inner spiritual state. Such a
state is the result of a conversion experience in which the
flesh-principle is crucified so that Spirit/Christ can take
up residence within the ego* Spirit/Christ gives an ade
quate dynamic for ethical living; He is the answer to Paul
and his followers need for a power which will enable one to
do his duty.
The presence of Spirit/Christ within the individual
produces the desired results in conduct. These results may
be summarized by the term, love, which is the central part
I
of God’s image which is reproduced by the Spirit of God in
the convert.
; Paul’s ethical mysticism does not require one to
withdraw from the world but to take one’s place within it '
and be concerned over its needs. The love which the Spirit '
produces is such concern. The convert will minister to the j
physical needs of men, will help bear their burdens, and |
will treat all men the same irrespective of their social or
93 :
economic status. Family ties and social and economic re- '
lationships are to be rooted in the love which the Spirit
implants in the individual.
In the ethical life which flows naturally from the
life in the Spirit/Christ the Apostle sees the highest ful- '
i
fillment of the self— a new creature in Christ Jesus.
Both the Gita and the epistles stress the inner
nature of ethics. Descriptions of character traits given
in the two writings are similar, as is also the enphasis
upon social concern. Both documents teach that the indivi
dual need not withdraw from the world of ordinary living in
order to be blessed of God since ethical conduct, based upon
union with Deity, is possible for each person in whatever
status he finds himself.
CHAPTER VII
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
I. SUMMARY
I
As an effort in the search for world unity by way of '
the understanding of world religions, this thesis has con
sidered the teaching of two representative writings of the
East and the West. The study of these writings, the
^Bhagavadgita and the Pauline epistles has been limited to
that of the nature and the realization of the self.
An adequate definition of the self is not possible
since in seeking for the nature of the self one is seeking
to define ultimate reality. The Gita teaches that there
are two selves within man— a lower self which may be identi
fied with mind/ego/personality that is really the false or
apparent self, and the higher Self within the sheath of the I
lower self which is called Atman and is thus Brahman, the
Supreme Self. The lower self is mutable and in a state of
subjection. The higher Self is changeless and persists
throughout all the experiences of life and survives the
crisis of death; it is free. This Self is not the soul in
the popular Western sense, but is the Divine Lord. It is
the core of inner calm where all tensions and fears cease.
It is within every person.
95
The Pauline epistles teach, not two selves, but that
i
Ithere are two types of persons--one is dominated by flesh
{sarx) and the other by Spirit (nneuma). The term, flesh,
is not applied primarily to the physical organism, but to
that principle within the individual which is hostile to
God and is capable of ruling the ego. In conversion the ego,
undergoes a crucifixion so that flesh is put down in order
that Spirit/Christ can rule. The ego persists through this
crucifixion. Paul in no place defines the ego. He assumes
its existence as a self-conscious, decision-making entity.
In the conversion process there is no change of essence:
the individual natural pneuma does not become divine Pneuma.
The change is a change in sovereignty. Furthermore, the
Spirit which assumes ruler ship is not within man innately
but must come from without.
Both the Gita and the epistles teach that man is more
than a psychophysical organism. But there is a profound
difference in the concept of what the "more than" really is.
The Gita teaches that it is Deity which is the real in
dividual Self within; the Apostle’s writings teach that ego/
mind is invaded from wlthout in the conversion process. The
natural pneuma does not become the divine Pneuma, but comes
under the authority of the latter. Both writings honor the
physical body as the vehicle for the manifestation of Deity.
96
In Self-realization, from the viewpoint of the Gita, '
man becomes what he is in reality, i*e,, Atman/Brahman.
Thus Self-realization is actually God-realization^ The dis-i
I
covery of the individual’s oneness with Deity is called
yoga. There are two aspects to yoga: the negative aspect '
lis called moksha; the positive one is called samadhi or ^
|ananda. Moksha is liberation from the effects of karma; the
'latter results in samsara, the cycle of rebirth. It is the
I
unliberated individual who is bound by necessity and thus
is not free.
Samadhi is not primarily, in the Gita’s teaching a
{way of mental discipline, but a state of calm and bliss
Iwhich may also be called ananda. It is the discovery of the;
core of inner calm within the sheath of the ego or false
jself. Moksha/samadhi may be realized while the individual
I
lives in his present body. He is to continue to work and |
to find realization in ordinary living, but his activity
must no longer be motivated by the desire for the results; ,
he must acknowledge that Brahman is the Doer.
I
I
' Although Self-realization may be attained before
death, there are some phases which await death and which are
epitomized in the term. Nirvana. The latter is not a physi-
1
cal Heaven in which the individual lives in a resurrection
i
ibody. It is the coming to Brahman where the false self is
97,
completely annihilated with its ego and senses, and the
true Self in the individual finds its fulness in Brahman,
the Supreme Self.
The Pauline epistles teach that in self-realization
man becomes what he was not, namely, a new creature. "In
Christ" and "with Christ" summarize the Apostle’s concept of
self-realization.
"In Christ" is by means of the crucifixion of the
sovereignty of the flesh so that the sovereignty of the
Spirit/Christ can be established. There are three elements
in Paul’s "in-Christ" mysticism; first, a sense of the im
mediacy of Christ’s presence within the self (Christ and the
individual self do not merge); secondly, a moral renewal, an
ethical transformation which results from the residence of
Spirit/Christ within the individual; thirdly, a corporate
Oneness through the fellowship, the church.
Although the individual may attain new creaturehood ,
before death, there are phases of the realization process
which await either death or the Parousia* Before either of
the latter events the individual continues to strive toward
blamelessness; at either of these events blamelessness is at
last realized in the presence of Christ. Also it is neces
sary to acquire a new body and be in a new environment--the
resurrection and Heaven are necessary for complete self-
i ‘ 98 ,
, realization. "In Christ" and "with Christ" may be epitomized
Iunder the term, sonship.
/ Both the Gita and the epistles teach that self-reali
zation is man’s chief goal# However, there is a difference i
in the nature of self-realization in con^aring the two
writings. The Gita teaches that man is to become what he !
essentially is, namely, Atman; the Pauline writings instruct
man to become what he is not, namely, a new creature in
Christ. Both state that freedom and happiness are a part of
realization which can be achieved before death, and both
teach that there is something more to be attained after
death. However, Nirvana is in no way equivalent to Heaven.
Both writings insist upon the fact that death is not to be ;
feared. Personality-fulfillment in the sense of the natural
ego or pneuma finding its potential is not taught in either
writing.
1
The Gita and the Pauline epistles are both concerned
with the obstacles which hinder men from attaining self-
realization. ignorance and desire are the chief obstacles
taught in the former; flesh is the obstacle taught in the
latter.
Ignorance, as defined in the Gita, is not intellectu
al error but spiritual blindness which prevents the individu
al from knowing his true Self. It is the result of maya
99
which deludes one into identifying his apparent self with
his true Self. Desire is the activity of the ego in seek
ing satisfaction in life from the senses. The chief out
working of ignorance and desire is in the individual’s
attempt to make himself the godhead; he believes that he is
the doer of all things. Other characteristic evils of the
spiritually ignorance include pride, anxiety, anger, and
covetousness.
The punishment for evil is inevitable due to the
inexorable law of cause and effect, karma. Karma leads to
samsara, the cycle of rebirth. There is, however, always
hope for the ignorant that the cycle will eventually bring
deliverance via opportunities for seeking the true know
ledge of the Self.
Flesh, the chief obstacle in Pauline thought, is not
ignorance of any type, but is perversion of the will. The
primary outworking of this perversion is hostility to God;
it is man’s refusal to acknowledge his creaturehood. Other
evils include egocentrism, selfishness, envy, covetousness,
and anger.
The punishment for sin is inescapable. It is the
wrath of God. The latter phrase does not refer to God’s
anger, but to that condition of cause and effect in a moral
universe. Those who are under the control of the flesh and
100;
I
Who refuse to find divine deliverance will suffer a final, !
eternal exclusion from God’s presence.
The sources of sin in the Gita and the Pauline
epistles are in contrast— maya, as spiritual ignorance,
stands in contrast to flesh, perversion of the will. How
ever, the catalogues of sin are similar. Karma as cause and;
effect and the wrath of God as cause and effect in a moral
universe have many similarities even though some connota
tions may differ. There is greater hope expressed in the
Gita for the rebellious evil one. The Apostle teaches a
finality to punishment which is not held in the Hindu book. |
The central portion of the teaching of both the Gita |
and the Pauline epistles is given over to the consideration ;
of the way or ways the obstacles to self-realization can be
overcome. Both teachings emphasize the importance of the in4
carnation of Deity in the overcoming process. ■
'^In the Gita Krishna is proclaimed to be the full
Incarnation of Brahman. The purpose of this incarnation, :
which may occur many times, is to teach the threefold path-
: . I
t ;
way to Self-realization. These three ways are set forth in ;
I
order to meet the temperamental differences of people. The '
first pathway is that of karma-yoga, the way of works* Work
i
done with the attitude that the Lord is the Doer delivers i
one from sin. Jnana-yoga, the way of wisdom, is the second ;
: 101
pathway, Jnana is not intellectual knowledge, but an in
tuitive, immediate experience of Being. To put the idea
into Western terms : in jnana ontology and epistoraology
merge. The individual knows that the Self in him is the
Supreme Self, Bhakti-yoga, the way of faith, is the third
pathway; it is the Gita’s unique contribution to the Hindu !
doctrine of salvation. Jnana is a way of striving; bhakti
is one of receiving. The individual feels his insufficiency
and finds refuge in God’s grace. Grace is God’s part and
faith, bhakti, is man’s part in the receiving# Yet all-
bo th grace and faith— is from within the individual.
Bhakti-yoga is open to everyone of all stations in life,
including the lower castes and women.
vf Knowledge of text is set forth as an inferior know
ledge by the Gita. However, such knowledge can lead to the
Higher Knowledge as, for example, Krishna tells Arjuna to
listen to his words. Rituals are minimized as far as their
importance is concerned in the realization of the Self.
The incarnation of God in Christ has for its chief
purpose the reden^tion of man. It occurred but once and has
significance only in terms of Jesus’ death and resurrection.
At the cross the divine activity called righteousness or
grace is made available for man. Grace is purely a gift of
f
God from without man’s being. How the cross removes the
University or iâouthern California LlbraQ^
! 102
barrier of evil is not discussed by the Apostle, but that
it does is emphasized in a variety of terms--justification,
reconciliation, forgiveness, expiation.
Man’s part in appropriating the activity of divine
love, grace, is called faith. Faith is intellectual in that
it is acceptance of text knowledge; it is volitional in that
it is the surrender of man to God; and it is mystical since
Paul makes it synonymous with "in Christ. " The result of
grace/faith is sonship.
Grace/faith becomes efficacious for the individual
in baptism. In the latter ritual the flesh-principle is
crucified and Spirit/Christ comes to abide in the individual.
The one way of salvation in the epistles is open to all men, I
but condemnation is pronounced upon anyone who does not
accept the one way.
The incarnation of Deity is central in both the Gita
and the epistles, but the purpose for the incarnation dif
fers. In the case of the Gita it is for pedagogical pur
poses; in the case of the epistles it is for reden^tive ones.
There is a consideration of varied temperaments in the Gita
as seen in the provision for a threefold pathway; the Apostle
teaches that there is only one way. The way of jnana is one
of striving and that of bhakti of receiving. For Paul there
is never any striving for salvation; it is all receiving.
j 103 ;
i Grace as taught in the Gita is from within man; for Paul it '
j is always from without. There is no concept of expiation
via a cross in the former as there is in the latter. Bhakti
i and Pauline faith have much in common especially the idea !
I of trust due to the feeling of insufficiency. Knowledge of |
I text and submission to ritual are of little consequence in !
i
I
the Gita, but of major importance in Pauline thought.
! It is in the field of ethics that the Gita and the
Pauline epistles find the most common ground. Both have a
!
background of ethical conflict. Both stress the inward na-
1ture of ethical motivation rather than external compulsion. i
Ethical conduct must be the natural by-product of yoga in
I
the one instance and of the indwelling Spirit/Christ in the !
other. For example, Arjuna discovered his duty in terms of
union with God; Paul found the dynamic to do his known duty |
by the possession of the Spirit/Christ. ,
Lists of ethical virtues such as unselfishness, com- |
passion, kindness, etc., are for all practical purposes
identical. I
i
Neither the Gita nor the epistles advise one to with-;
I
draw from the world of activity. In fact, in both cases the,
social ramification of ethics is stressed. The yogin and '
i
the convert must be concerned with the welfare of the world,!
especially in guiding men to the way/ways of salvation, i
Il, CONCLUSION ;
The summary of this thesis has set forth the many |
similarities and the many differences between the Bhagavad-
gita and the Pauline epistles. In considering these simi
larities and differences there must be a constant guarding
against either a forced merging of the two religious doc
trines or a forced antagonism or separation.^ Some of the
differences are profound, as for example, the concept of the
Self, the idea of the goal for the Self, the nature of evil,
and the doctrine of salvation, especially in comparing the
Gita’s teaching with the Pauline doctrine of the cross; the
t
former has no comparable belief. But the similarities are
also profound: the common desire for freedom and bliss in
reaching Deity (cf. yoga with a life hid with Christ in
God), the practical aspects of the manifestation of virtues
and vices in everyday living, and the admonition in both
teachings to remain in the world and serve.
Thus there are many bridges which may span the chasm
between East and West. First of all, there are bridges of
common interest. Even though the nature of the self and the
goal of the self differ, the fact that there is a common
^ Mani D. Patial, "Christian Prayer and Raja Yoga: a
Study in Correlation," p. 1.
10$ ;
, I
interest in the self and its realization constitutes a meet-|
ling ground for mutual sharing of ideas. The way of salva- |
I I
tion in the Gita may differ greatly in some phases of the '
doctrine with that of the epistles. But again there is the I
'meeting ground of a mutual desire to find the means to over-|
I I
icome the obstacles to realization. I
I
‘ Secondly, there are bridges of common belief in cer- |
itain practical aspects of everyday living. The source of
evil may vary in the two teachings, but the outworking of i
{evil does not; catalogues of vices are similar. Also, as I
fit has been shown, the results of self-realization in ethical
' I
conduct— the need for inner motivation and the catalogues of
jVirtues— are identical. i
I
On those bridges of understanding there can be mutual!
tsharing of truth so that the temporary and perishable ideas |
which are applicable only to a limited historical period or j
to a limited geographical area may be put in the background |
so that the eternal and imperishable truth which is applic- |
able to all ages and all countries and found in both teach- ^
ings may take precedence.^ |
i
The followers of Pauline thought may find help in '
achieving greater integration through the examination of the;
2 S. Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita, p. 5#
io6
nature of the Self as taught in the Gita. Paul apparently
was never quite sure of his ultimate salvation: cf. ". . .
I
I pommel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to ;
I i
others I myself should be disqualified" (I Corinthians 9:2?)i
!
{The Gita in helping mankind discover the one eternal Person i
" I
within the individual would make possible a permanent resoluf
I
tion of such conflict and uncertainty. I
I The followers of the teaching of the Gita may find
help in achieving a greater assurance of release from karma
'and all obstacles by a reasonable interpretation of the
doctrine of the incarnation of Jesus as Redeemer. No doubt,,
some men need to have a dramatization of the grace of God
such as is accomplished in the doctrine of the cross rather
than a mere announcement of its truth in a teaching session.3
The Gita can help mellow the tendency in Christianity
toward Pauline intolerance. The epistles can help focus
the eternal truth in the Gita upon Jesus Christ whom P.
Chenchiah calls the first fruits of a new creation and the
symbol of a new uni versai. 4
^ There are many facets to Paul’s interpretation of
the cross. His emphasis on the expiation of the wrath of
God may be placed in the background so that his other em
phasis upon the cross as the manifestation of the love of
God may take precedence: "But God shows his love for us in
that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us" (Romans
5:8)
^ Sri. Hamakrishnan Centenary Memorial, The Cultural
of—-India- ,—IT,—3^4^ *-----------
B I B L I O G R A P H Y
A. BOOKS
Akhilananda, Swami, Hindu Psychology. New York: Harper and
Brothers, 19if6. 2I 4.I pp.
Andrews, Elias, The Meaning of Christ for Paul. New York: ;
Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1%9# 266 pp. ;
Andrews, Mary Edith, The Ethical Teaching of Paul. Chapel :
Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1934.. I
185 pp.
Angus, S., The My3tery-Religions and Christianity. New York:
Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1925-I92FI 3^9 pp.
, The Religious Quests of the Graeco-Roman World. New
I York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1929* PP
Aurobindo, Sri, Essays on the Gita. New York: The Sri
Aurobindo Library Inc., 1950. 580 pp.
, Essays on the Gita. Second Series; Revised edition;
Calcutta: Arya Publishing Hbus03-194-2-1945. 44*^ pp.
Bernard, Theos, Hindu Philosophy. New York: Philosophical
Library, 19lj.7. 207* pp.
Bouquet, A. C., Hinduism. London: Hutchinson’s University
' Library, n.d. 171 pp.
Burton, Ernest DeWitt, A Critical and Bzegetieal Commentary i
on the Epistle to tSe Galatians. Tbe International !
; Critical Commentary; New York: Chas. Scribner’s Sons,
1920. 54-1 pp.
I
, Spirit, Soul, and Flesh. Reprinted, with Additions ^
and Revisions from the American Journal of Theology, i
' 1913-1918: Chicago: The University of Chicago Press,
I9I8. 21k pp. i
Campbell, James M., Paul the Mystic. London: Andrew Melrose,'
1907. 285 pp. ;
: i
Cave, Sydney, Hinduism or Christianity? New York: Harper and
Brothers, 1939' 2k0 pp. I
109
, Redemption Hindu and Ctoiatian. London: Oxford
University Press, 1919# 2b3 pp.
Coomaraswamy, Ananda K., Hinduism and Buddhism. Hew York: '
Philosophical Library, n.d., 86 pp.
Gross, George, Christian Salvation. Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press, 1923% 254- pp.
Dasgupta, Surendrana th, A History of Indian Philosophy. i
3 vols.; Cambridge, ?reat Britain: darnbrIdge University i
Press, 1932.
______ , Hindu: Mysticism. Chicago: The Open Court Publish-
Co., 1927. 16H pp.
Davies, W. D., Paul and Rabbinic Judaism. London: Society !
for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge, 1948# 376 pp.
Deissmann, Adolph, Paul. Translated by William S. Wilson; ,
Second Edition; London: Hodder and Stoughton Ltd., 1936.|
323 pp#
, The Religion of Jesus and the Faith of Paul. Trans
lated by William E. Wilson; Second Edition; London:
Hodder and Stoughton Ltd., 1926. 284 PP#
Desai, Mahadev, The Gospel of Selfless Action or The Gita
According to Gandhi. Ahmedabad, India: HavajIvan
Publishing House, 1946# 390 pp.
Dodd, C. H., The Epistle of Paul to the Romans. The Moffatt^
Hew Testament Commentary; Hew York: Harper and Brothers,!
n.d.♦ 246 pp.
Duncan, George S., The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians.
The Moffaft Hew Testament Commentary; Hew York: Harper
and Brothers, n.d. 199 pp. ,
I
Edman, Irwin, The Mind of Paul. Hew York: Henry Holt and
Co., 1935. 187 pp.
Enslin, Morton S., The Ethics of Paul. Hew York: Harper
and Brothers, IÇ3Ô. 335 pp. ,
Parquhar, J. H., to Outline of the Religious Literature of ;
India. London: Oxford University Press, 1926. 451 pp.
110
I
______ , The Crown of Hinduism. London: Oxford University :
Press, 1920. II5’ 9 PP*
Frame, James E., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
Epistles of S?. Paul to the Thessalonians♦ The Inter
national Critical Commentary; New York; Chas. Scribner’s
Sons, 1912. 326 pp. ;
Guenon, Rene, Introduction to the Study of Hindu Doctrines. i
Translated by Marco Pallis; London: Luzac and Co., 1945#!
351 pp. '
, Man and His Becoming. According to the Vedanta.
Translated by Charles Whitby; London: Rider and Co.,
n.d. 267 pp.
Hatch, William H. P., The Pauline Idea of Faith. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press, 1917% 55 pp.
Hiriyanna, M., Outlines of Indian Philosophy. London:
George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 193È. 439 PP•
Hoyle, R. Birch, The Holy Spirit in St. Paul. Garden City,
New York: Doubleday, Doran, and Co., I928. 319 PP*
Hume, Robert E., The Thirteen Principal Upanishads. Second
Edition, Revised; London: Oxford University Press, 1931#
587 pp.
Klausner, Joseph, From Jesus to Paul. Translated from the
Hebrew by William F. St Ine spring; New York: The Mac
millan Co., 1943. 624 pp. I
Knox, John, Chapters in a Life of Paul. New York: Abingdon-
Cokesbury Press, 1955. 1F8 pp.
Khudson, Albert C., Basic Issues in Christian Thought. New
York: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, ligSo. 22*0 pp.
Kumarappa, Bharatan, The Hindu Conception of Deity. London:
Luzac and Co., 1934^ 356 pp. |
i
Macnicol, Nlcol, Indian Theism. From the Vedic to the
Mudhammadan Period. London: Oxford University Press, ,
1915. 292 pp. ,
I
McKenzie, John, Hindu Ethics. London: Oxford University
Press, 1922. 267 pp.
Ill ;
Michael, J. High, The Epistle of Paul to the Phllippians. |
The Moffatt Hew Testament Commentary; Garden City, Hew ;
York: Doubleday, Doran, and Co., Inc., 1929* 230 pp.
Moffatt, James, The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians;
The Moffatt Hew Testament Commentary; Hew York : Harper 1
and Brothers, n.d* 286 pp. |
'Morgan, W., The Religion and Theology of Paul. Edinburgh: |
I T. & T. Clark, 1917# 272 pp. ;
: I
Hiebuhr, Reinhold, The Nature and Destiny of Man. 2 vols.; j
New York: Chas. Scribner’s Sons, 194-7. ;
, 1
Hikhilananda, Swami, The Bhagavad Gita. New York:
Ramakr i shna - Vi vekananda Center, 1944-# 386 pp.
i ______ , The Upanishads. Vol. One; New York: Harper and
I Brothers, 1949# 319 PP#
Northrop, F. S. C., The Meeting of East and West. New York: I
The Macmillan Co., 1946# 531 pp.
Otto, Rudolf, The Original Gita. Translated and edited by j
J. E. Turner; London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1939#i
309 pp. I
Parsons, Ernest W., The Religion of the New Testament. New i
York: Harper and Brothers, 1939# 278 pp. '
Pfleiderer, Otto, Paulinism. A Contribution to the History ;
of Primitive Christian Theology; translated by Edward !
Peters; 2nd Edition; two vols.; London: Williams and '
Northgate, I89I.
Porter, Frank C., The Mind of Christ in Paul. Hew York:
Chas. Scribner^s Sons, 1930# 327 p p#
Prabhavananda, Swami, Vedic Religion and Philosophy. Madrasj
India: Sri Ramakrishna Math, 1943# 171 pp.
Prabhavananda, Swami, and Christopher Isherwood, Bhagavad-
Gita. Hollywood: The Marcel Rodd Go., 1947. Î87 pp.
Prem, Sri Krishna, The Yoga of the Bhagavat Gita. New York:
Harper and Brothers, 1949# 224 PP#
112:
Quimby, Chester W., Paul for Everyone. Hew York: The
Macmillan Co., 194-7. 17& PP.
______ , The Great Redemption. (A Living Commentary on
Paul’s Epistle to the Romans.) Hew York: The Macmillan
Co., 1950^ . , 213 pp.
Radhakrishnan, S., Eastern Religions and Western Thought. |
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1939# 394- PP• j
, Indian Philosophy. 3 vols.; London: George Allen !
and Unwin Ltd., n.d.
, The Bhagavadgita. Hew York: Harper and Brothers,
T ^ 8r ~ 35g'pp . ----
The Hindu View of Life. London: George Allen and
Unwin Ltd., 1927. 133 PP#
. The Philosophy of the Upanishads. Revised, Second
edition; London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1935.
lif-3 pp.
Rail, Harris P., According to Paul. Hew York: Chas.
Scribner’s Sons, 194-5. 272 pp.
Riddle, Donald W., Paul: Man of Conflict. Nashville:
C oke sbury Pro s 8% 194-0 • 2lpf pp.
Ross, Floyd H., Addressed to Christians. Isolationism vs.
World Community. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1955.
1514. pp. I
Roy, Anilbaran, editor. The Message of the Gita. As Inter
preted by Sri Aurobindo. London: George Allen and
Unwin Ltd., 1938. 28l pp.
Ryder, Arthur W., The Bhagavad-Gita. Chicago: The Universi
ty of Chicago Press, I929. 139 PP# !
Saunders, Kenneth, The Gospel for Asia. (A Study of Three
Religious Masterpieces: Gita, Lotus, and Fourth Gospel);
New York: The Macmillan Co., 1928. 24-5 pp. ;
Schweitzer, Albert, Indian Thought and Its Development.
Translated by Mrs. Charles E. B. Russell; Hew York; 1
Henry Holt and Co., 1936. 272 pp.
113
The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle. Translated by
William Montgomery; Hew York : Henry Holt and Co., 1931. ‘
kll pp. I
Scott, E. P., The Epistles of Paul To the Colossians. To 1
Philemon, and To the Ephesians. The Moffatt Hew Testa- |
ment Commentary; Hew York: Richard R. Smith Inc., 1930. '
257 pp. I
, The Spirit in the Hew Testament. Hew York: George j
H. Doran Co., 1923. 256 pp. j
Sri Ramakrishna Centenary Memorial, The Cultural Heritage of'
India. 3 vols.; Calcutta: Sri Ramakrishna Century
Committee, n.d.
Stevens, George B., The Pauline Theology. New York: Chas. t
i Scribner’s Sons, 1S94. 383 PP*
Stewart, James S., A Man in Christ. (The Vital Elements of ;
St. Paul’s Religion). New York: Harper and Brothers, I
1935. 332 pp.
1
Strachan, R. H., The Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinth^
ians. The Moffatt New Testament'^ommentary; New York: |
Harper and Brothers, n.d. lii9 PP* '
{Weiss, Johannes, The History of Primitive Christianity.
Edited by Frederick C. Grant; 2 vols.; New York: Wilson-:
Erickson Inc., 1937.
The New Testament. Revised Standard Version; New York: ‘
Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1946. 546 pp. j
B. UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS
I
'Davis, Holland N., "The Bhagavad-Gita and the New Testament:
A Coiqparison." Unpublished Bachelor of Divinity thesis.
The University of Southern California, Los Angeles, 1927*
1 1 5 p p . :
I j
Patial, Mani D., "Christian Prayer and Raja Yoga: a Study ini
Correlation." Unpublished Doctor of Philosophy disser- i
tation. The University of Southern California, Los |
Angeles, 1949* 5o4 PP*
University of Southern California UbJWBy
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
A study of the social work program of the Disciples of Christ in Los Angeles County
PDF
The Reformed Church of Hungary and its setting in the religious life of the United States
PDF
Social conditions of Palestine in the seventh and eighth centuries B.C. as revealed by the prophets
PDF
A sociological study of the Buddhist churches in North America, with a case study of Gardena, California, congregation
PDF
A comparison of the teachings of John Wesley and of modern religious psychologists concerning the higher forms of religious experience
PDF
A study of the culture of the Ainos, with special reference to their religious life
PDF
Friedrich Nietzsche's conception of Superman and the eternal recurrence
PDF
A critical study of the pragmatism of William James
PDF
A study of the social attitude of the Congregational churches in the United States
PDF
Socialization tendencies of the Protestant Church in America
PDF
A study of modern capitalism in the light of the ethics of Jesus
PDF
A study of the behavior and ideas of certain children of the Church of All Nations in the light of their home background
PDF
A critical examination of the Salvation Army from the standpoint of purpose and methods
PDF
The religious life of Japanese children in America
PDF
The Fourth Gospel: A study in contrasts
PDF
The psychology of sanctification: A study of the dynamics of Christian character
PDF
The psychology of motivation in the synoptic Gospels
PDF
The psychology of sentiment in religion
PDF
The psychology of religious forms of worship in the English speaking churches of the city of Los Angeles
PDF
The person of Jesus in modern research
Asset Metadata
Creator
Casebeer, Albert John
(author)
Core Title
Concepts of self-realization (a comparison of the concept of self-realization in the "Bhagavadgita" with that concept in the Pauline Epistles)
Degree
Master of Arts
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
OAI-PMH Harvest,philosophy, religion and theology
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Digitized by ProQuest
(provenance)
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-1215
Unique identifier
UC11262922
Identifier
EP67916.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-1215 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
EP67916.pdf
Dmrecord
1215
Document Type
Thesis
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Casebeer, Albert John
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA
Tags
philosophy, religion and theology